Five reasons we need a new stadium

Posted by

By Brian Keir

This is second part of my look into the Stadium Issue. Here we look at just some of the reasons why we need a new stadium.

Competing With Other Top Teams


While not small Anfield  is undersized compared to our rivals – Old Trafford has 76,000 seats, the Emirates has 60,000,  and Chelsea can count on Abramovich for match day revenue.

Until we have a new stadium, we will not be able to compete with the top teams in terms of match day revenue.

Which despite TV deals, Sponsorship and other forms of revenue is still one of main sources of revenue for Liverpool.

The Surrounding area of Anfield


For anyone who have visited Anfield and the surrounding area knows, the area is in desperate need for re-development.

I personally lived in Anfield for a few years as a child, the street i lived is now completely empty of residents and its a similar story for most of the housing and buildings with abandoned business and derelict houses a common sight.

This is due to lack of any investment in the area.

Liverpool has already made a commitment with the council to aid development  of the area to the sum of millions of pounds. The reason?

Liverpool has received several grants from the Council and the Government towards the stadium to help towards the regeneration of the whole area.

Liverpool also has several planned property redevelopments in and around the new Anfield Stadium area, that should generate millions of pounds to help towards costs.

Sponsorship Investment


Liverpool will need to sell there naming rights of a new stadium to cover some of the massive costs it would entail to build.

Carlsberg Liverpool’s former shirt Sponsor has already shown an interest in naming rights a long the lines of “The Carlsberg Anfield Stadium” and I’m sure would several other companies would also make a bid.  The price could easily reach well over £100 million.

This is however not a possible funding option If Liverpool redevelop Anfield.

Fans would not want any renaming of the old stadium and wouldn’t be as attractive to potential sponsors were as a brand new stadium with no name in place would be.

Less Disruption


There is several  reasons why the club have dismissed redeveloping Anfield several times over the years.

Anfield is completely surrounded by Terraced Housing, demolishing them would cause several issues and long planning despite the club purchasing up all the housing years ago.

The size of a redeveloped Anfield would also not come near the 70,000 stadium capacity Liverpool would need to compete in the long term.

New planning permission would also have to be sought and as we have seen before it can takes years to get permission from the Council and then Government for building work and construction.

While all the work was taking place Anfield would have several if not all stands closed during that period –  this would severely affect revenue in the short term but more importantly stop a lot of fans seeing the game.

The new stadium however has full planning permission done and work could almost start immediately if the funds were in place.

The Future


While a redeveloped Anfield might meet the clubs needs for the next ten years or so its  simply not a viable long term solution.

Eventually some time in the future we will need a new stadium.

Most clubs in the league are looking into rebuilding or moving to a new Stadium.

West Ham recently won the race to take over the Olympic Stadium. Tottenham despite loosing out on the Olympic Park also have planning permission for a new ground.

The thought of a bigger/redevolped Anfield is nice it is still a pretty old ground compare to modern football standards with restricted views in the Main Stand and old wooden Seating.

Liverpool need and deserve the best state of the art facilities to compete with not just English Clubs but also European Clubs into the future a new stadium with state of the art facilities would go a long way to insure we remain among the elite for way into the future.

What do you think of this issue ? Let us know below!


  1. I’d like to stay at Anfield. I’ve been to Old Trafford a number of times and also to the Bernabeu when we played Madrid in the Champions League and both are massive intimidating stadiums that literally topple over you. The Emrirates is a great state of the art stadium. But it doesn’t for me anyway have the same imposing impact. You literally have to stare vertically above you to see the sky at the Bernabeu. And I think the atmosphere Anfield can generate would never be the same at a new stadium and all the unique history of Anfield would be gone. Obviously the legal work involved would be a nightmare. Having the knock down surrounding areas, and of course it has been blocked in the past. But If it could be done, it should be. I just look at what Man United have done with Old Trafford, and for me that is the way to go.

  2. Stay at Anfield, where i was brought up, It’s home for us, put 15,000 extra seats on Anfield that will do!!!!

  3. I’d like to stay at Anfield. I don’t think we could stay as great as we are when we leave. Anfield is sacred to me and probably to the other fans too.

  4. Spurs and West Ham were prepared to move miles for a new stadium. We are very lucky that we have permission to build a new stadium just the other side of Anfield Road. One of the biggest concerns seems to be having the history of Anfield being bulldozed. Well, does a new stadium really mean that Anfield needs to be demolished? Unlike Highbury, the plot of land has little value. Can’t Anfield remain, at least for a decade or two, as a venue for reserve games etc and the home of the LFC museum, stadium tours etc? Maybe this would give us the best of both worlds, until we have some ‘new history’ to remember at the new stadium.

  5. As much as it makes sense to stay at anfield with all its tradition its time to let go of the past and start a new era. A new ground along with new surrounds will be a breath of fresh air for the club financally. A modern version of the old anfield would be ideal ….. long live the real reds not those plastic ones from down the road.

  6. build 100,000 seated stadium and manage the tv-right to boardcasting because now liverpool itself has the most tv-watching fans around the world over manu and spanisd teams. and if they know that liverpool has their own right in the asmosphere of 100,000 stadium. How wonderful scene would be. the liverpool fans around the world will not buy the sky or any media but buy directly to liverpool-tv.

  7. I would hate to leave Anfield. Redeveloping the existing ground is the way ahead, be a sin to lose the atmosphere that Anfield inspires. Cant be that diff to get more seats in there.

  8. I am on the fence on this one. There are a lot of good reasons to build us a new stadium, there are also a lot of good reasons for us to stay at anfeild. What i want is for the club and fans to benefit to the maximum from either.
    Hope John Henry make an informed decision on this and sticks to it.

  9. I think NESV will look to refurbish Anfield for two reasons. First, their experience with Fenway Park — which was slated for demolition and relocation before they took over — has been wholly positive. They have added significant new seating and turned the area surrounding the stadium into a Red Sox precinct that just throws off money through team shops, restaurants and bars. If you don’t have tickets, people still go there to watch the games and soak up the atmosphere (and lay out big cash). Having saved Fenway, NESV have effectively created a halo around the team and the Red Sox brand for purists that has made them the most marketable baseball franchise (yes even bigger than the Yankees, particularly outside of their immediate home market). Don’t underestimate the value of this for sponsors (BTW Fenway has no sponsor name attached to it and likely won’t unless some smart company pays to ‘save the name’ as a presenting sponsor ie Fenway Park presented by…)

    Second, NESV are nothing if not number crunchers. I suspect they are looking at the economics of the sport and asking themselves of the merit of taking on debt in a world of “financial fair play”. I think in the next few years, Man U will run up against this problem because of the Glazer’s problems with their real estate empire — I think Sunday was a symptom of how depleted their squad now is — and that is going to force them to turn every coin over twice before they spend it.

    On the revenue side, fans will have less money in their pockets over the coming 2-3 years (and that’s optimistic) and clubs won’t be able to simply assume there will be bums in seats 50000-70000 for mid-week Carling Cup matches against Accrington Stanley.

    The real opportunity is to look at how LFC can broaden and diversify their base without relying so heavily on Anfield. This is the real secret and real opportunity of NESV lies, namely, television. They own NESN a cable TV network that shows only sports. They carry every Red Sox game, every Celtics (basketball) and Bruins (hockey) as well as local college matches and those of their AAA affiliate. In between they have created content that is Red Sox themed (eg a reality show where a guy takes different dates to a game at Fenway). It is a money machine as well as an incredible platform for brand building.

    Let’s face it every major club has tried to set up their own LFCTV/MUTV/ChealseaTV and no effort has succeeded particularly. If NESV can figure this out and spread the LFC brand to the US, Asia and South America using their TV savvy we have a big chance to steal a march on the rest.

  10. As Tushar says, it’s a mixed back. Less money for the team if we blast on a whole new stadium. I’d like to see what we couldn’t provide in Anfield with a redevelopment.

  11. stay at Anfield..redeveloping it to 60,000-65,000 capacity is a significant leap for the revenue IMHO, plus Anfield is sacred for being Anfield and part of Liverpool itself

  12. NO NO NO – only rebuilding, i dont want a new stadium. We have a great history and we must save this history . This is like Pyramids or Coloseo in Rome. Anfield – our history.

  13. It would be sad to leave Anfield but in a 100 years time, LFC will still be going strong. It’s unrealistic to think we could still be at Anfield then. We have to move with the times and forget sentimentality. LFC have a waiting list of 65,000 for season tickets. Every week we’re at Anfield we’re losing money and therefore the opportunity to buy the best players. The suburb of Anfield could benefit from LFC moving a mile down the road too. The whole area around the ground could be redeveloped for miles around. I can’t see how Anfield could be expanded by 30,000 plus. We need at least 70,000 seats. The inside of the stadium is nothing special, changing rooms, museum, press room etc. We have to break our tie now and put it down to the re emergence of the sleeping giant we are. Anfield is great but it’s LFC fans who are special. A disappointing 2 decades came to a head recently and now the futures very positive. Now is the time to accept if LFC are to become great again we have to put the past behind us and (quite literally) build for the future. TheCriminal.

  14. Total dumbdumb thinking.Move to a new stadium? What are you even thinking of? Anfield is a time capsule of thousands af Scousers and none who were the lifeblood of our club.Anfield is our past, present and future….what are you thinking of? Moving out to a concrete Kentucky Fried Chicken style parking lot so the toffs can have more room to stretch their important legs?
    Liverpool cannot afford to leave Anfield. I live in Italy and they just cannot believe that we would even consider getting shut of part of our heritage…just for a few extra shillings?! Madness..Move out of Anfield and we will lose our home advantage for the big European nights and the big league games…I’m so surprised that some people are so naive to think otherwise…perhaps they don’t have the family-thing and the connections that take many of us back generations at Anfield.
    Add on another 10,000 but moving out would be suicide.The City Council tried that with the Cavern club and then belatedly rebuilt it , acknowledging what a cobblers they had made….Liverpool,(the city) has made many mistakes like that in the past…Please don’t let’s make another wopper

  15. A new stadium is the way to go! LFC need to look to the future! I lived in the area also and have supported the REDS since 1952!(59 years)but I feel it is time to make a move! IF IT IS DECIDED TO REDEVELOPE,WHO CAN GUARANTEE THAT THE ATMOSPHERE WILL REMAIN THE SAME! The whole stadium would more than likely have to be turned around so that the goal’s would be at the north & south ends! The ‘KOP’ would be at the ‘side’ of the pitch! A new stadium in the fantastic setting of ‘Stanley Park’ would look magnificent!

  16. Having more seats is one way to get more revenue into the club. And I think the owners are thinking just that, its just ONE way to get money into the club. Other avenues will be considered. Luckily I’m not a businessman. I don’t think I really know whats best.

  17. The argument in favour of staying at Anfield seems to be one of intrinsic value. Yes, we have great memories of Anfield but there will come a day in 50 years or so where no one will be around who was actually at those games the memories are built on. The fans then will look around them and wonder how the other top teams have much better facilities, revenues and possibly players. If the Ataturk Stadium is knocked down tomorrow, will we lose our memories of Istanbul? I remember when the Kop had to become all seated. I fully accepted this had to be but wondered if the atmosphere would suffer. Nights against Chelsea in the CL reminded me that it didn’t. The Kop had to change. It was progress (and obviously by law). I wouldn’t want to stand on the Kop now as it was in the early 80’s but back in 89/90 i couldn’t look at it that way. For those supporters in 50 years time they won’t be bothered either. Anfield will just be part of our illustrious history, to them. Unfortunately, football is a business too and LFC have no given right to be at the top. We have to earn it and compete with other clubs. Utd make 40m a season more than us from matchdays (admittedly, a percentage of that is due to higher ticket prices) but the extra fans going to the game is good for merchandise and good for the city. Already, hotels and restaurants in Liverpool are dependant on Scandinavians and Irish (et al) supporters coming to watch LFC. LFC is about more than a game of football. I hope the club don’t shoot themselves and the prosperity of the city in the foot over these memories. I’m sure Everton have memories too but would they want to stay at Goodison, lol. I’m unsure what stance to take over the scattered ashes as that’s a more tricky issue. To conclude, football is not going to die from popularity over the next 100 years. Far from it as new markets open world wide. LFC need to be prepared to meet the new challenges and Anfield won’t be able to either meet or sustain those challenges in the future without changing the current set up beyond recognition. TheCriminal

  18. Redevelopment won’t provide enough seats. A new 60k seat stadium which can be easily and quickly expanded to 70k+ at a later date is the path ahead. We are indeed fortunate planning permission has been granted to build across the street in Stanley Park. Its very likely a new stadium would be finished before we received planning permission to start construction on a redeveloped Anfield.

  19. I’m with @vonherff and Scousethroandthro.Anfield is what sets us apart from all the teams in England.Redevelop it.Don’t throw it away.It’s not just about seats,am i the only one who is distraught at the thought of losing that PITCH? that hallowed TURF?!!The new one would not be the same.I don’t care how long it takes,either.Modernise all the facilities,do what ever needs to be done to please the ‘new breeds’and Ronald McDonalds and let’s just STAY PUT..Please.MAHALO

  20. I think I have covered the stadium issue in my articles from top to bottom. The majority remain with the idea, myself included, that there should be a redevelopment of Anfield together with the surrounding area. I reckon its no use discussing this further until FSG take their final decision on what will be done.
    On a final note, should they go for a new build, I’d prefer the stadium to be named Stanley Park Arena rather than Carlsberg Arena.
    If we loose the Anfield magic, we loose half our heritage.

  21. Since they will build a new stadium to increase revenues, naming rights revenues are too much to discard offhand. Keep in mind that naming rights can be sold again and again, eventually paying off the stadium. I know of one stadium in America that has sold its name three times. It took over twenty years to pay off the stadium finally, but naming rights revenues are now fully profit…

  22. the only way i’ll accept lo leave Anfield is if it was converted into some kind of museum. And the new stadium does not become “calsberg stadium” or anything like it.

    Despite that, it was a good article

  23. Personally if we are to revedelop (and seeing we have purchased all the surrounding properties for demolition, then something like a state of the art looking stadium that Hicks & Gillet were proposing would be lovely. My only concern is do we have enough space to expand to up to 80,000 seats if needed be?

  24. I can’t understand those who want to redevelop the old Anfield rather than build a brand new super-stadium in a magnificent Stanley Park setting. The park is so close it could still be called “Anfield” and could still have a “Kop” end.

    OH, and by the way, I’m well over 70…!! – one of the old school who used to stand on the Kop way back in the days when the Beatles latest hits were sung by 56,000 of us every Saturday afternoon or when Ian St John, Callie, Big Rowdy and Stevie Highway would run out for Shankly on those electrifying European night matches…!!!

    All the magic of those days could be recaptured again – but under a giant new roof…!!!

Comments are closed