Can Liverpool’s Stanley Park match Manchester United’s Old Trafford in 2010?
Liverpool are hoping to start work on the Stanley Park stadium in May (with the actual construction starting in July) of this year - estimates suggest that it will take 3 years for the stadium to be finished.
If Liverpool want to compete with Manchester United, that’s not good enough.
The simple fact is that currently, the 60,000 capacity proposed for Stanley Park is at par wit Arsenal’s Emirates but 16,000 behind that of Manchester United. Already, there are rumours that Manchester United are discussing plans to further extend that capacity so that Old Trafford holds 90,000 by 2009.
90,000!
Gillett and Hicks are hoping to either increase the proposed capacity or leave room for expansion when the stadium construction starts, but is it really feasible to plan for a stadium of 60,000 in 2010 when your league rivals can fit in 30,000 more fans by that time?
It’s one thing to pack a 40,000 stadium full of fans, it’s quite another to pack one that seats 70,000.
Update: I meant to say here that financially it’s a world of a difference to have 70k fans at your home games.
Personally I have no doubt that Liverpool can seat that many fans at Stanley Park as well.
My only concern is that 60k will not be enough for Liverpool in 2010.
And if Manchester United do have such expansion plans, there is little doubt that they can fill the seats for all league home games. That’s a lot of extra cash, and extra cash not only helps service the debt but increases the club’s value, attracts investors and generally helps the owners to bring more money into the club.
Gillett and Hicks are smart businessmen - their PR blitz has proven it. Now it’s up to them to secure Liverpool’s future by giving the fans the biggest possible stadium.
Can Stanley Park match Old Trafford?
- Liverpool need DIC to match the Big 3
- How Big is Your Pitch?
- Liverpool takeover financed by 298m loans, but it’s all OK
- Liverpool fans consortium confirms £500m bid for Liverpool FC
- South Park Quiz: Who’s That Footballer?
Discussion - 13 Responses
Add Your Comment
Comments are moderated (our comments policy).
You only have to look at the amount of people on the season ticket waiting list to know that Liverpool would be able to fill a 70,000 seater stadium easily and that if they are able to expand further in the future a 90,000 seater would be filled too. Especially since Liverpool will soon become a city with only one team in the Prem, once the “small club” move to Kirkby….every little helps.
Hate to say it ahmed but razor is probably right on this one! I’m sure liverpool fans can fill up a 70,000 stadium.
Liverpool need to really assess what the impact of such an investment would be on such an untried basis. Consider if they dont win anything for another 4 years but have to try and fill a stadium that is 40% bigger than they have currently.
It is already established that Liverpool have a diminishing fan base globally and also within the UK. Newcastle are also another club gambling that a bigger stadium could be filled. If you look at attendances in the 1980’s for this urban myth of a club, the statistics prove the point and Liverpool should consider this closely and understand why 60,000 is the more appropriate volume they should be aiming for and outright competition with a club club such as Manchester United is not only unrealistic but also dangerous considering the amount of debt the new owners have incurred already but will do with the new stadium
Yes, Stanley Park will certainly match Old Trafford. Perhaps not in capacity, but certainly in terms of atmosphere and I doubt Old Trafford will be able to fill up 90,000 seats, therefore i don’t see this expansion completed in close future. ManU can only dream of atmosphere in Anfield Road, and of fans which Liverpool Fc has, let them expand as much as they want…
Today Anfield is always at capicity for each and every home game and there still not enough tickets to go round.
With 55000 applications on the waiting list for season tickets, and growing each season. There is absolutely no doubt Liverpool FC certainly can fill 70,000 seats to home fans alone; Not only would they comfortabley fill a stadium seating 70,000 but they’d have no trouble in filling 100,000+ seats.
I was refering to the impact this would have on the clubs finances, not whether Liverpool can fill that many seats.
I have no doubt that Liverpool can fill a 80, 90,000 seater. So can Manchester United. So can Arsenal, probably, if they sort out their traffic issues around the stadium.
I think there is a miss conception that United have the most fans. Official figures show that Liverpool have the third greatest fan base in Europe of 18m fans, behind only Barca & Real. That’s not pundit opinion but actual research figures that were published only 12 to 18 months ago.
That would suggest that LFC would manage to fill that size of stadium especially with 50K waiting list.
Although I don’t think we could match United for prawn brigade and so we might have to have more of the cheaper seats.
As far as the time scales, New Anfield is due for completion at the end of 2008 which calculates to one & half years against the 3 suggested. Thought that still will mean a difference of 16k in capacity, United interest payments and loan management is far greater than what has been put on Liverpool’s shoulders. So it might just workout that parity is achieved.
That’s not to say that we would then be at the same level. We will still need few years of enjoying such riches to catch up with the effect of having higher quality players over the period of time that United has enjoyed.
In 5 years we will be able to see what difference the new stadium will have on both clubs.
Chris, I don’t know were your information has come from, its sounds like Andy Grey giving an opinion “established!!!“ some where in the realms of fantasy. Liverpool is one of the most supported clubs in world football. In Europe only Real & Barca are ahead and United some way behind though I know most English fans don’t want to know such confirmed facts. Please try to establish things with hard facts and not pundit opinions.
it would be really cool if you could find a source (a link) to the study you’re quoting. I believe you as I think I’ve read that somewhere myself, but it would be nice to read the actual study instead of blindly quoting it.
These clubs do surveys themselves before deciding whether to increase capacity at their stadiums and take into account current ticket demand from their own figures. That’s why Liverpool have decided on 60,000 they know how big their week in week our audience realistically can be.
So do United.
Ahmed
I was trying to think of its title, but senility seems to have taken over. If memory serves, it was an EU survey of some sort. I will try to see if I can locate it. It was reported in the board sheets at the time.
SickyBurp
The only reason LFC have decided to have 61k is due to planning restrictions on the area and infrastructure. Should a proposal to route a train to the vicinity, then 80 or 90k would be feasible. Old Trafford has ample space and few residential problems while Anfield is surrounded by terraced housing and barely accessible now with 45k, imagine twice the numbers.
no way can Liverpool compete with United.United are the most supported team throughout the world just look at the tour to Liverpool”s Manchester Uniteds had alot more people waching any way all i think is United are better than Liverpool on the pich and in the popularity.
Manchester United and Liverpool are both massive clubs however there can be no argument whatsoever as to which club has been more successful and which has a larger fan base. Liverpool are the best supported team in the UK and second in the World behind Barcelona. Niether side would have any problem filling a 90,000 capacity stadium. However Liverpool are wise in only opting for a 60,000 capacity stadium initially as the cost to the club is going to be huge. If you read the stadium design carefully you see that it is being built so it can be “easily” expanded in the future if needs be.
I personally don’t think any club should be allowed to have a stadium bigger than Wembley (limit clubs to 89,000) obviously this is never going to happen, I just like the national stadium to be the biggest!