• Hey Guest!
    Enjoy the This Is Anfield Forums but want to remove the adverts? Now you can do so by clicking here.
    Thanks for your support!

Anfield Expansion - Main Stand and potential Anfield Road End



Lowton_Red

No football club is successful without hard work.
Ad-free Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2015
Messages
2,189
One of the Echo pieces characterized that as Everton paying £6-7M of interest per year - which at the 2.38% you note is going to be very close to the Year 1 interest rate obligation. It was the line that made me curious as to whether or not it was concessionary or even 0%, because it implied the City could just keep that interest payment.

If your guess is correct, that Everton will be serving principal and interest of ~£15M per annum for 25 years, plus paying a fee of £6-7M to the City, that equates to borrowing at about 6.5%. For an infrastructure project like this, that is rather poor - especially if you have to pay a second tranche of lenders an additional premium for the mezzanine position of £220M.

That's some real financial wizardry right there, an at best mediocre interest rate for part of what you need, while compromising a city's credit rating. Maybe defensible from the city's point of view, as long as it all works out right.

It is sort of striking in all the sources I have read that it is utterly unclear on how the principal is getting paid back.
In this article in the Echo, "financial guru" Joe sets out the basis of the deal:

"So what we are doing is looking at borrowing from the Public Works Loans Board, £280 million over 25 years and then we are going to loan it to Everton and that rate is cheaper than what they can get at a commercial level from a bank.

So we are going to be borrowing at about 1.2% and we will be charging Everton at about 3.4%, so it means that we will make £7m a year profit that comes into the council coffers every year and the loan will be repaid by Everton and not by us."


From this it is evident that Generous Joe is wildly inaccurate when it comes to his knowledge of the interest rates available from the PWLB, or the commercial rates currently available. So much for his grasp of financial matters.

However it does tend to conform to my understanding of the deal in that the £6.5 million to £7 million is the premium everton will pay over and above the repayments to the PWLB.
 

Arminius

FSG PR plant
Moderator
Joined
Aug 13, 2008
Messages
24,592
In this article in the Echo, "financial guru" Joe sets out the basis of the deal:

"So what we are doing is looking at borrowing from the Public Works Loans Board, £280 million over 25 years and then we are going to loan it to Everton and that rate is cheaper than what they can get at a commercial level from a bank.

So we are going to be borrowing at about 1.2% and we will be charging Everton at about 3.4%, so it means that we will make £7m a year profit that comes into the council coffers every year and the loan will be repaid by Everton and not by us."

From this it is evident that Generous Joe is wildly inaccurate when it comes to his knowledge of the interest rates available from the PWLB, or the commercial rates currently available. So much for his grasp of financial matters.

However it does tend to conform to my understanding of the deal in that the £6.5 million to £7 million is the premium everton will pay over and above the repayments to the PWLB.
Not sure that it does. though it does appear to confirm Anderson's understanding. If you are loaning £280M at 3.4% having borrowed at 2.2%, your spread on annual payments is £3.7M. For the first couple of years, there is a difference of the interest portion that actually falls in the £6-7M range, but you are still repaying principal so the spread is the net gain. I have not looked at the PWLB terms or found any sort of scheduling in the discussion of the Everton deal, so those are rough numbers using a single annual payment of the same size every year - but tweaking that is not going to change the fundamentals.

Honestly, that arrogant column in the Echo suggesting people were obtuse in not understanding this deserves a real beatdown.

That Simpsons monorail song is playing in my head.
 

The Elusive 19th

TIA Youth Team
Joined
Jan 30, 2011
Messages
4,986
Echo has become more and more and more Everton supporting. Sometimes I even think they despise us fully and think that they are full anti- LFC.
 

Lowton_Red

No football club is successful without hard work.
Ad-free Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2015
Messages
2,189
Not sure that it does. though it does appear to confirm Anderson's understanding. If you are loaning £280M at 3.4% having borrowed at 2.2%, your spread on annual payments is £3.7M. For the first couple of years, there is a difference of the interest portion that actually falls in the £6-7M range, but you are still repaying principal so the spread is the net gain. I have not looked at the PWLB terms or found any sort of scheduling in the discussion of the Everton deal, so those are rough numbers using a single annual payment of the same size every year - but tweaking that is not going to change the fundamentals.

Honestly, that arrogant column in the Echo suggesting people were obtuse in not understanding this deserves a real beatdown.

That Simpsons monorail song is playing in my head.
Perhaps I was being a tad naive, but I took the last part of "Would-I-Lie-To-You" Joe's statement, " the loan will be repaid by Everton and not by us" to mean that everton would repay all of the loan, i.e. the principal plus the interest that Liverpool Council would pay back to the PWLB, and, that in addition, everton would pay £7 million per year to the Council for its trouble.

Thinking about it, for the premium to be calculated as a percentage uplift on the PWLB terms, and for that premium to remain at a fixed amount of £7 million per year, the PWLB loan would have to be a "Maturity" loan : half-yearly payments of interest only with a single repayment of principal at the end of the term.

The best rate currently available to the council for a maturity loan (the Certainty rate) is 2.68% which translates as £7.53 million per year. So everton would pay the council £14.53 million per year for 25 years, after which the blueshite would have to stump up £280 million.

And pigs will fly.
 



Kopstar

★★★★★★
Joined
Jun 15, 2007
Messages
13,923

Anfield rd Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Ad-free Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2012
Messages
11,523
Munich the German capital? :eh?:

A train station would make a massive difference to the whole area. How much do you think the City would want the club to pay towards it?!
Quite a big chunk I imagine but it is linking up with other projects that are being worked on like the plans to extend the rail networks anyway.
 

Mascot88

Yours for £1m. Need to make room for Dean Saunders
Admin
Joined
May 24, 2007
Messages
21,828
Munich the German capital? :eh?:

A train station would make a massive difference to the whole area. How much do you think the City would want the club to pay towards it?!
Didn’t Islington council pay for Arsenal’s?
 



Wilkored08

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
2,659
Can anyone answer my query???? Why, when the team leave their changing room, do they line up against the wall on the away team side...why don't the line up , on the wall opposite their own changing room...it always looks so awkward..... (just an observation and I bet there's an obvious answer)
 

Red_Jedi

Anfield kick about
Ad-free Member
Joined
May 30, 2017
Messages
1,801
Can anyone answer my query???? Why, when the team leave their changing room, do they line up against the wall on the away team side...why don't the line up , on the wall opposite their own changing room...it always looks so awkward..... (just an observation and I bet there's an obvious answer)
Is it to do with when they walk out on the pitch - ie red will want to walk out on the Kop side (rather than annie rd) which is where the home bench is?
 

Red_Jedi

Anfield kick about
Ad-free Member
Joined
May 30, 2017
Messages
1,801
These are the rail plans being worked on. At first the Anfield line seemed low down on priority list. Recent talk seems that it's becoming more likely;

I heard that if the club can get a rail link to anfield, then the council would approve a bigger Annie Rd end - total capacity could exceed 60,000.... but as it is, it is limited to 60,000.
 

Wilkored08

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
2,659
Is it to do with when they walk out on the pitch - ie red will want to walk out on the Kop side (rather than annie rd) which is where the home bench is?
Cheers thank you.... I know its too late...but they could have changed the changing rooms around....to me it always looks awkward...anyway cheers I knew there would be a reason.
 

Kopstar

★★★★★★
Joined
Jun 15, 2007
Messages
13,923
I heard that if the club can get a rail link to anfield, then the council would approve a bigger Annie Rd end - total capacity could exceed 60,000.... but as it is, it is limited to 60,000.
This is often said but I don't believe that there's currently an official restriction, is there?
 



Red_Jedi

Anfield kick about
Ad-free Member
Joined
May 30, 2017
Messages
1,801
This is often said but I don't believe that there's currently an official restriction, is there?
I thought that 60000 capacity max was in the current ARE planning application. But to me it looks like the only reason they haven't started it is because of the possibility of going bigger - now that the train station talk is coming out. Then maybe resubmit with inclusion of train station - and maybe get to 65000? There won't be any height or light issues at ARE as it backs on to the park - so they could have a 3 tier annie road, and also expand the hospitality seats (as that has been sold out all season)....

Once Everton eff off, we could even buy goodison - use part of it for landfill, and the other part for live screenings whilst anfield is full...
 

Anfield rd Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Ad-free Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2012
Messages
11,523
This is often said but I don't believe that there's currently an official restriction, is there?
we've never apllied for more so dont think there would be anything official. But everything I've ever seen on it has that as a basic understanding. If we are only just getting what we are asking for through by skin of our teeth as it is....
 

Kopstar

★★★★★★
Joined
Jun 15, 2007
Messages
13,923
we've never apllied for more so dont think there would be anything official. But everything I've ever seen on it has that as a basic understanding. If we are only just getting what we are asking for through by skin of our teeth as it is....
I've got a feeling that there were increased infrastructure costs and requirements for a 75k seater new stadium that was contemplated under H&G, above that needed for a 60k seater new stadium but a) that was in respect of a new stadium not a redevelopment and b) I don't believe it was ever stipulated at what point between 60k and 75k those additional infrastructure requirements would kick in.

I haven't seen any capacity restrictions/conditions referenced with regard to a redevelopment of Anfield. I'm sure there will be some at some point but I haven't seen any set out, yet.
 

liveforthereds

asp67 twitter
Joined
Apr 20, 2008
Messages
5,959
Munich the German capital? :eh?:

A train station would make a massive difference to the whole area. How much do you think the City would want the club to pay towards it?!
Personally the club should not have to put anything into it, The area needs Rail Services as the area only has bus links at the moment, this area has no real train services yet a Goods Line runs through the middle of it, This line would give those who live in the area a direct link to Lime Street and down to Bootle. Stations could be built along this line at Edge Lane, Tuebrook, Anfield and also down by Everton's ground. Yes the Club would benefit but the wider community would be the biggest winners in this, as there every day to day life would be improved with faster links to the city which would give them access to the wider train network as Trains could run from Bootle direct to Manchester as well as Liverpool City Centre.
 

liveforthereds

asp67 twitter
Joined
Apr 20, 2008
Messages
5,959
I've got a feeling that there were increased infrastructure costs and requirements for a 75k seater new stadium that was contemplated under H&G, above that needed for a 60k seater new stadium but a) that was in respect of a new stadium not a redevelopment and b) I don't believe it was ever stipulated at what point between 60k and 75k those additional infrastructure requirements would kick in.

I haven't seen any capacity restrictions/conditions referenced with regard to a redevelopment of Anfield. I'm sure there will be some at some point but I haven't seen any set out, yet.
I think you are right, Only time there has been talk of restriction's was on a new build on the park, as for the current redevelopment it's never been talked about, personally I feel they would restrict the capacity unless better transport link was in place, but as I point out above the area would benefit from Train links no matter what the club wants to do.
 



Kopstar

★★★★★★
Joined
Jun 15, 2007
Messages
13,923
Personally the club should not have to put anything into it, The area needs Rail Services as the area only has bus links at the moment, this area has no real train services yet a Goods Line runs through the middle of it, This line would give those who live in the area a direct link to Lime Street and down to Bootle. Stations could be built along this line at Edge Lane, Tuebrook, Anfield and also down by Everton's ground. Yes the Club would benefit but the wider community would be the biggest winners in this, as there every day to day life would be improved with faster links to the city which would give them access to the wider train network as Trains could run from Bootle direct to Manchester as well as Liverpool City Centre.
I fully agree mate but the city council has a history of squeezing out maximum s. 106 contributions to effectively fund projects that should be paid for out of public funds.
 

Lowton_Red

No football club is successful without hard work.
Ad-free Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2015
Messages
2,189
I've got a feeling that there were increased infrastructure costs and requirements for a 75k seater new stadium that was contemplated under H&G, above that needed for a 60k seater new stadium but a) that was in respect of a new stadium not a redevelopment and b) I don't believe it was ever stipulated at what point between 60k and 75k those additional infrastructure requirements would kick in.

I haven't seen any capacity restrictions/conditions referenced with regard to a redevelopment of Anfield. I'm sure there will be some at some point but I haven't seen any set out, yet.
This same story, upgrading the Bootle branch line for passenger transport, pops up every few years. Merseytravel keep resurrecting it as it is one of their pet fantasies projects.

Planning consent has never been sought for a stadium capacity in excess of 60,000, so there has never been any formal statement regarding a requirement to invest in transport infrastructure, or the exact increase in capacity that would trigger the need for this investment.

However when a possible increase to 70,000 - 80,000 was mooted (c.a. 2007) the council "let it be known" that they would only support the application (for increased capacity) if Liverpool committed to invest in local transport infrastructure e.g. this article in the (now defunct) Liverpool Daily Post:
New rail link crucial for 80,000-seat stadium plan
 

liveforthereds

asp67 twitter
Joined
Apr 20, 2008
Messages
5,959
I don't really understand why it is a big thing, for either the City Council or the Club. The amount of fans that would use the Trains would not make any difference as the amount of trains required to run to move thousands of fans would not be practical, If Merseyrail run the services along this line it would be at most a 6 car set which would be about 500 passengers (Not sure of actual figure), so would that make a big difference to the thousands that attend a game, Merseyrail currently run a 15 minute service and yes Grand National week they run 7 minute services, but that impacts on the rest of the network, would they want to do this every weekend of midweek game I doubt it, so if my Figures are right the most that could use the train would be roughly 4k in the 2 hours before the game. If Northern was to run services I think it would be less as the new train/current stock they can only put at most a 4 car set on which holds far less than the Merseyrail trains. So while a small amount can be moved in this way it would not really make that much of a difference in the great scheme of things.

So for me this would be more about the Council/Government getting a much needed rail link on the cheep
 

Arminius

FSG PR plant
Moderator
Joined
Aug 13, 2008
Messages
24,592
I don't really understand why it is a big thing, for either the City Council or the Club. The amount of fans that would use the Trains would not make any difference as the amount of trains required to run to move thousands of fans would not be practical, If Merseyrail run the services along this line it would be at most a 6 car set which would be about 500 passengers (Not sure of actual figure), so would that make a big difference to the thousands that attend a game, Merseyrail currently run a 15 minute service and yes Grand National week they run 7 minute services, but that impacts on the rest of the network, would they want to do this every weekend of midweek game I doubt it, so if my Figures are right the most that could use the train would be roughly 4k in the 2 hours before the game. If Northern was to run services I think it would be less as the new train/current stock they can only put at most a 4 car set on which holds far less than the Merseyrail trains. So while a small amount can be moved in this way it would not really make that much of a difference in the great scheme of things.

So for me this would be more about the Council/Government getting a much needed rail link on the cheep
I think you are dramatically underestimating capacity - one of those Alstom two car sets can carry up to 600 people with standing. On match days, the train at the Allianz runs every 5 minutes from downtown, with apparently some six car sets. But even with the smaller ones, that is 7200 per hour from a single line. In Munich most of the traffic originates from the centre, I would guess at Anfield that would still be true, albeit it somewhat better balanced. Assuming say 3k per hour from the opposite direction, and using your two hour window, a single line could manage 1/3rd of the current capacity - which in turn takes a lot of pressure off the other alternatives.
 

dockers_strike

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2017
Messages
740
I think you are dramatically underestimating capacity - one of those Alstom two car sets can carry up to 600 people with standing. On match days, the train at the Allianz runs every 5 minutes from downtown, with apparently some six car sets. But even with the smaller ones, that is 7200 per hour from a single line. In Munich most of the traffic originates from the centre, I would guess at Anfield that would still be true, albeit it somewhat better balanced. Assuming say 3k per hour from the opposite direction, and using your two hour window, a single line could manage 1/3rd of the current capacity - which in turn takes a lot of pressure off the other alternatives.
I cannot speak for German fans but, historically, English fans have a record for trashing trains especially after games so, brand new Alstom 2 and 3 car trains arent going to be risked carrying footie fans and, there's a reason 'football specials' were eventually stopped by British Rail. They basically got wrecked trains back each Saturday which were only good for the scrappers.

Also, the infrastructure isnt in place on UK railways to make this much vaunted benefits of a station viable, people are wedded to their cars and dont want to have to hop on a bus or train to make a short journey to a park and ride then queue up with everyone else all trying to get out the car park at the same time. I know I dont. A train generally only goes to one destination even though it has stops but people come from different directions to get to games. There arent going to be hordes of trains coming from different parts of Merseyside, Lancashire or Cheshire.

Home and away fans travelling together on the same train to a station serving Anfield? Yeah, I can see that going well. Training in manchester united or say chelsea fans on match days? Yeah, a good pinch point for trouble. Even then, the station and line would likely only be used every other week for 3 or 4 hours. The idea that everton fans would swell the numbers and therefore benefits is pie in the sky thinking to me.

Talks of 70,000 and 80,000 capacity was fanciful when this new stadium in Stanley Park was being considered. Anything over 65,000 and even that is going to be very difficult to achieve at Anfield. People go into fanciful mode talking about increasing the Kop. They ignore the buildings and Walton Breck immediately behind it.

ARE represents the only viable space for expansion, one the club needs to get right to give the best sight lines and capacity increase. 63,000 is, imvho, going to be the best the club can squeeze in.
 



Arminius

FSG PR plant
Moderator
Joined
Aug 13, 2008
Messages
24,592
I cannot speak for German fans but, historically, English fans have a record for trashing trains especially after games so, brand new Alstom 2 and 3 car trains arent going to be risked carrying footie fans and, there's a reason 'football specials' were eventually stopped by British Rail. They basically got wrecked trains back each Saturday which were only good for the scrappers.

Also, the infrastructure isnt in place on UK railways to make this much vaunted benefits of a station viable, people are wedded to their cars and dont want to have to hop on a bus or train to make a short journey to a park and ride then queue up with everyone else all trying to get out the car park at the same time. I know I dont. A train generally only goes to one destination even though it has stops but people come from different directions to get to games. There arent going to be hordes of trains coming from different parts of Merseyside, Lancashire or Cheshire.

Home and away fans travelling together on the same train to a station serving Anfield? Yeah, I can see that going well. Training in manchester united or say chelsea fans on match days? Yeah, a good pinch point for trouble. Even then, the station and line would likely only be used every other week for 3 or 4 hours. The idea that everton fans would swell the numbers and therefore benefits is pie in the sky thinking to me.

Talks of 70,000 and 80,000 capacity was fanciful when this new stadium in Stanley Park was being considered. Anything over 65,000 and even that is going to be very difficult to achieve at Anfield. People go into fanciful mode talking about increasing the Kop. They ignore the buildings and Walton Breck immediately behind it.

ARE represents the only viable space for expansion, one the club needs to get right to give the best sight lines and capacity increase. 63,000 is, imvho, going to be the best the club can squeeze in.
On the other hand, I can't see light rail being the main method for away fans arriving. Derbies would be a particular challenge, but that is manageable - the Milan derby is not always a cheerful one, they just lay on 'red' and 'blue' trains. You are probably right about the challenges of the tradition of English fan culture, but on the other hand, weren't those all football specials intercity? A train from central Liverpool to Anfield would not even be 10 minutes, would it?

Regarding the overall transport infrastructure, you are probably correct, but isn't the fundamental point that that quadrant of the city is underserved and therefore at present a challenge to improve? I don't think anyone would see this as a single station and short line extension project.

Agree about the capacity point, made similar arguments myself - the fact that league cup games don't sell out suggests that demand is not as enormous as some think - the curve is probably an odd one, with fairly intense demand along most of it rather than an enormous pool, i.e. of the people who want tickets, a high percentage of them want tickets for every league game, rather than the sort of 'tailing off' in demand that most events have.
 

liveforthereds

asp67 twitter
Joined
Apr 20, 2008
Messages
5,959
I cannot speak for German fans but, historically, English fans have a record for trashing trains especially after games so, brand new Alstom 2 and 3 car trains arent going to be risked carrying footie fans and, there's a reason 'football specials' were eventually stopped by British Rail. They basically got wrecked trains back each Saturday which were only good for the scrappers.
Main Reason they stopped Football Specials was in 1995 the rail network was franchised off to private companies who 1 saw no benefit in running these types of train services, why you may ask reason being to run these services would mean having rolling stock sitting around for most of the year doing nothing meaning they are paying to have trains sitting doing nothing. In todays train market companies only have enough trains to cover the timetable as they rent the trains they use unlike in BR days when they owned the trains. Railways are basically split into 3 areas infrastructure (Network Rail) train operators and then a little know fact the leasing companies who own the trains. 2nd reason most football specials where put on by the clubs so they would be cheaper for the fans to get to games and usually they would only be used for major games like finals.

Now in Liverpool we run the Soccer bus from Sandhills to both grounds, it was a well used service a number of years back but today I don't know who well it is used. In Manchester - Utd run trains from Oxford Road station to the ground years ago it was 3 trains used to ferry fans back and forth today I am not sure what happens but I know there was talk of ripping up the Halt to make way for something else, they do have an advantage in today the trams are running and are quite frequent, we don't have that in Liverpool and it could be something Merseytravel and CC should revisit
 

dockers_strike

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2017
Messages
740
On the other hand, I can't see light rail being the main method for away fans arriving. Derbies would be a particular challenge, but that is manageable - the Milan derby is not always a cheerful one, they just lay on 'red' and 'blue' trains. You are probably right about the challenges of the tradition of English fan culture, but on the other hand, weren't those all football specials intercity? A train from central Liverpool to Anfield would not even be 10 minutes, would it?

Regarding the overall transport infrastructure, you are probably correct, but isn't the fundamental point that that quadrant of the city is underserved and therefore at present a challenge to improve? I don't think anyone would see this as a single station and short line extension project.

Agree about the capacity point, made similar arguments myself - the fact that league cup games don't sell out suggests that demand is not as enormous as some think - the curve is probably an odd one, with fairly intense demand along most of it rather than an enormous pool, i.e. of the people who want tickets, a high percentage of them want tickets for every league game, rather than the sort of 'tailing off' in demand that most events have.
Why are fans suddenly going to jump on a train from say, Lime Street, when they can either share a taxi or get on a bus? Trains wouldnt be every 10 minutes, they'd have to compete with normal train movements into and out of the station and ability to get on the branch line. Train operators will not be very happy at having their timetable disrupted to accommodate these fan trains. The UK rail system is a hotch potch with Network Rail owning the infrastructure and rail companies running their trains.
 

Arminius

FSG PR plant
Moderator
Joined
Aug 13, 2008
Messages
24,592
Why are fans suddenly going to jump on a train from say, Lime Street, when they can either share a taxi or get on a bus? Trains wouldnt be every 10 minutes, they'd have to compete with normal train movements into and out of the station and ability to get on the branch line. Train operators will not be very happy at having their timetable disrupted to accommodate these fan trains. The UK rail system is a hotch potch with Network Rail owning the infrastructure and rail companies running their trains.
To make it work, the matchday 'window' would have to be optimized - which is managed in many other places, including where the lines are not owned by the train operators.

No question to make it work would require some bespoke arrangements at other stations. But in places where it has been put in place, it is fantastically convenient, I think the question of why they would answers itself when you see how a system like that can operate. When you can avoid 40 minutes of traffic with an 8 minute train ride, it is becomes compelling.
 

liveforthereds

asp67 twitter
Joined
Apr 20, 2008
Messages
5,959
Why are fans suddenly going to jump on a train from say, Lime Street, when they can either share a taxi or get on a bus? Trains wouldnt be every 10 minutes, they'd have to compete with normal train movements into and out of the station and ability to get on the branch line. Train operators will not be very happy at having their timetable disrupted to accommodate these fan trains. The UK rail system is a hotch potch with Network Rail owning the infrastructure and rail companies running their trains.
New services along this line can easily be done as they don't have to all start in Lime Street some services can start at Edge Hill as there is a bay between Platforms one and two that could be reintroduced. The realty though is it would have to be service operated by the Northern franchise as MerseyRail run third rail traction. So unless network rail but down 3rd rail it would need to be diesel services.