Liverpool miss funding deadline

[rowlho]

I would think they have the dough If not and they share with the blues then it wont be popular either side of stanley park

[Falconhoof]

what a stupid article. Says we've missed some deadline and then goes on to say

 

"The European Objective 1 programme makes its decision on the funding in two weeks, on September 28.

 

Even if the club does come up with a last-minute financial plan to show how it will fund the 60,000-capacity stadium, it will have to be with the committee's lawyers by midnight next Thursday to comply with legal regulations ahead of that meeting."

 

So we haven't missed anything at all.

[jon_hall]

It is from the daily Evertonian after all.

[Ian Mc]

what a stupid article. Says we've missed some deadline and then goes on to say

 

"The European Objective 1 programme makes its decision on the funding in two weeks, on September 28.

 

Even if the club does come up with a last-minute financial plan to show how it will fund the 60,000-capacity stadium, it will have to be with the committee's lawyers by midnight next Thursday to comply with legal regulations ahead of that meeting."

 

So we haven't missed anything at all.

 

I think it means that Flo Clucas as head of the committee placed an informal deadline of last friday for us to provide evidence of funding. The Decision is made next Thursday 28th so we must have until then to submit something and sit round the table. At this stage in the process i think deadlines don't mean jack-s***, i'ts just a bargaining tool for them to use in the local media. And boy they are using it.

 

Anyway come on Rick, hurry up and find the pin number for the Bank of Ireland Gold Card

[Falconhoof]

 

 

 

What's an 'informal deadline' though Ian? Thats why I was having a go at the article. If its an informal deadline then its not a legal deadline and so what the hell is she blithering on about. Its not even a bargaining tool, they've got nothing to bargain for or with.

 

I liked her better when she was Aunt Flo in Bod.

[Ian Mc]

What's an 'informal deadline' though Ian? Thats why I was having a go at the article. If its an informal deadline then its not a legal deadline and so what the hell is she blithering on about. Its not even a bargaining tool, they've got nothing to bargain for or with.

 

I liked her better when she was Aunt Flo in Bod.

 

I'm just basing my assumptions on the article mate. Bargaining tool was the wrong word what i was trying to say that she keeps applying pressure via the media on LFC to stump up evidence of our investment. Previous articles like "It's time to Put up or shut up" etc .

 

Or maybe the article is indeed a load of s****.

[Falconhoof]

The editorial team of the daily post want their nipples pulling off with rusty pliers!

[Rico]

If it came to sharing - they would have to abandon all plans to move

 

Too many season ticket holders from both clubs just wouldn't go.

 

I reckon there'd still be more than enough people that rank getting a season ticket above pride in not sharing a stadium with Everton.

 

Who cares if the blue lot don't sell their STs? =)

[Ian Mc]

The editorial team of the daily post want their nipples pulling off with rusty pliers!

 

Just emailed aunty Flo , asking her about the merits of reviving Bod for a new series on Childrens TV. Will post any feedback once received .....

 

[Guest Marshy]

Hop atoo pom pom pom hop atoo pom pom pom hop atoo pom pom pom pom pooooooooooooooom.

 

Goodnight folks.

[R A Softlad]

Just emailed aunty Flo , asking her about the merits of reviving Bod for a new series on Childrens TV. Will post any feedback once received .....

 

 

You missed the deadline for Bod revival it was a week next thursday.

[Maldini]

Much ado about nothing...again. This one Clucas seems to like getting her name in the paper.

[Michael]

The negotiations with Everton broke down when they refused to pay anything towards a Trophy room on the grounds that they would never use it.

[fyds]

What's an 'informal deadline' though Ian? Thats why I was having a go at the article. If its an informal deadline then its not a legal deadline and so what the hell is she blithering on about. Its not even a bargaining tool, they've got nothing to bargain for or with.

 

I liked her better when she was Aunt Flo in Bod.

Flo Lucas has been against this from the start - be interesting should someone ask her why exactly and what is the nature of her relationship with Steven Broomhead?

[Armin_Tamzarian]

My take on it is the NWDA are kicking up a fuss over their share of the funding LFC have the upper hand here if the stadium doesn't go through the regeneration of the Anfield area falls down. I think we are doing some brinkmanship, we have stopped dealing direct with the NWDA and maybe after the build starts there will be a change of personal at the quango that was prepared to give Everton over 10m in grants for the Kings Dock yet are kicking up a stink over 2m for us..

 

The NWDA have big financial problems, Broomhead took over an agency which had overcommitted itself. They've been looking for ways to trim overheads for a long time. For a number of reasons a shared stadium suits them, EFC and the council a lot more than it suits Liverpool FC.

Edited September 19, 2006 by Armin_Tamzarian

[Falconhoof]

What i want to know is what if they turn around next Thursday and say Liverpool FC will not be getting the £10 Million Objective One grant and £5 Million NWDA grant. Does our whole plan go t*** up like the papers say? Surely if we are looking to privately finance a stadium costing £200 Million+, £15 million isn't a very significant piece in this financial pie (ahem).

 

Question Questions Questions.....

 

 

Why would they say that though Ian ? They've already said that the money is there for the project if we can prove we have the funding.

 

So effectively you are asking 'what if we don't have the funding in place' ?

 

Parry has promised all along that we'll have the funding, I can't believe for one minute he'd have let it get to this stage without making damn sure he could raise the finance. His nuts are in the grinder if he hasn't.

Edited September 19, 2006 by Cardinal Fang

[fyds]

What i want to know is what if they turn around next Thursday and say Liverpool FC will not be getting the £10 Million Objective One grant and £5 Million NWDA grant. Does our whole plan go t*** up like the papers say? Surely if we are looking to privately finance a stadium costing £200 Million+, £15 million isn't a very significant piece in this financial pie (ahem).

 

Question Questions Questions.....

No it won't effect the actual stadium itself - that funding is primarily for the redevelopment of the old anfield site.

[Falconhoof]

No it won't effect the actual stadium itself - that funding is primarily for the redevelopment of the old anfield site.

 

 

But isn't the planning permission conditional on redevelopment of the local area which this money takes care of ?

[fyds]

First off the funding is there its the problem with the NWDA that is making everyone jittery. The Echo reporters have an interest in the NWDA they get all their info on local issues through them so they have become their mouth piece, have you heard one whisper from them over the delaying tactics used by the NWDA and its Everton friends on there? Has there been a named quote on the issue, no all you get is a senior official said this or that.

 

The tenders for the work on the New Anfield went out a couple of months ago and builders are being sussed out to take the job on, problem we have in the city is there is so much work top builders don't want to get involved in something that could be risky. Building stadiums is not the best way to get profit. The green light was lit a good while ago and unless one of the major investors pulls out at the last minute then it will go ahead.

 

Parry and Moores have done a sterling job keeping the thing alive, the NWDA is determined to throw a spanner in the works, it knows that sooner or later it will have to help dig out Everton who after new European legislation on stadiums becomes law in a year or two their s*** hole of a ground will cost a small fortune to get up to scratch. It's the Liverpool way of doing things not to go public until the deals are done and the ink is dry on the contracts.

 

There is no way any director of LFC will put forward a shared stadium. They would sooner move out to Knowsley than do that. Not just on the grounds of not wanting Everton but economically it would not make sense, no matter what the Echo and their Bluenose mates say.

 

My take on it is the NWDA are kicking up a fuss over their share of the funding LFC have the upper hand here if the stadium doesn't go through the regeneration of the Anfield area falls down. I think we are doing some brinkmanship, we have stopped dealing direct with the NWDA and maybe after the build starts there will be a change of personal at the quango that was prepared to give Everton over 10m in grants for the Kings Dock yet are kicking up a stink over 2m for us..

 

The NWDA are tied in though now, no matter how much they wriggle - and are committed to handing over the dosh once we have shown the council our bona fides.

[Gomez]

What i want to know is what if they turn around next Thursday and say Liverpool FC will not be getting the £10 Million Objective One grant and £5 Million NWDA grant. Does our whole plan go t*** up like the papers say? Surely if we are looking to privately finance a stadium costing £200 Million+, £15 million isn't a very significant piece in this financial pie (ahem).

 

Question Questions Questions.....

 

The issue is not the money, it's the planning permission according to the papers, if they withdraw the funding they effectively withdraw planning permission as I can't see us paying for regenerating the area (and why should we when the money is there) but the planning permission is for stadium and regeneration.

 

I have no inside info, but the NWDA and council seem to be doing the reputation of our city no favours. Other local councils seem to fall all over themselves to encourage their premier teams to expand and grow because of the prestige exposure it gives them all around europe, it really does seem to me that ours is doing everything it can to stop us.

[Falconhoof]

I have no inside info, but the NWDA and council seem to be doing the reputation of our city no favours. Other local councils seem to fall all over themselves to encourage their premier teams to expand and grow because of the prestige exposure it gives them all around europe, it really does seem to me that ours is doing everything it can to stop us.

 

 

Without wishing to defend the NWDA and council in any way (see my previous posts) our situation is radically different from other local councils who 'encourage their premier teams to expand'. We have decided to remain in Anfield and build on a greenfield site. Despite the relevent area of the park being mostly car park its still classed as a greenfield and indeed heritage site. So its far removed from the likes of Arsenal or Southampton or Middlesborough who simply moved to sites ready and waiting for development.

Had we been in a position to move to Speke, for instance then wemight be in the new stadium now.

[RaoulD]

I think the describing it as a "funding deadline" is a massive overstatement. Objective One funding can only be obtained if certain conditions are met in an area of population. Certain parts of merseyside meet the required criteria including the area around Anfield. The funds cannot be released until there is evidence of matched funding. Flo Clucas had no legal power to impose a deadline upon the club but as she heads the committee which is empowered to release the funds, she must ensure that the other requirements are met. If anything the deadline she sought to impose is indicative of a desire on the part of both the City Council and her committee to progress the project as soon as possible.

 

If the club is not able to meet the requirements by the 28 September (and I personally think that this will almost certainly be the case), the decision on the release of funds will be deferred. The reality is that these schemes often take years to plan and implement and the actual release of the grant is often delayed by the complications that inevitably arise in any major redevelopment project. If the funds are not released on 28 September there will not be an alternative available and it would be extremely embarrassing for the Merseyside objective one committee as a whole since the money was obtained from the EU on the basis of submissions made by the committee

[fyds]

The issue is not the money, it's the planning permission according to the papers, if they withdraw the funding they effectively withdraw planning permission as I can't see us paying for regenerating the area (and why should we when the money is there) but the planning permission is for stadium and regeneration.

 

I have no inside info, but the NWDA and council seem to be doing the reputation of our city no favours. Other local councils seem to fall all over themselves to encourage their premier teams to expand and grow because of the prestige exposure it gives them all around europe, it really does seem to me that ours is doing everything it can to stop us.

 

That's not strictly accurate. The planning permission to us is for the stadium and it's support structure alone. The regeneration though tied to our build, is not piad for by us - to go ahead the council are worried that the nature of the agreement means they may have to find money for the regeneration should external funding be withdrawn. It's all a storm in a teacup though.

[R A Softlad]

How much are we exopecting from the sale of Anfield and will it come off the £180m that's being put about as a cost?

[Falconhoof]

How much are we exopecting from the sale of Anfield and will it come off the £180m that's being put about as a cost?

 

 

We aren't selling it. we're giving it away as a free public space.

 

seriously.