Here's a post from Soccernet:


Liverpool are rapidly coming to the conclusion that they will have to move from their beloved Anfield if they are to challenge Manchester United's domination of the English game.

It will be viewed as little short of heresy in some quarters to abandon the ground that has been home for 108 years. Traditionalists can count on chairman David Moores to champion their cause as long as he remains in charge. Others share his sense of attachment but are becoming ever more exasperated by a ceiling on attendances that has been stuck at 44,000 since local residents dug their heels in and refused to make way for an expansion scheme.

Chief executive Rick Parry and the influential media group Granada are looking beyond sentiment and embracing the belief that they must somehow match United's 60,000-plus ground capacity.

While there are no immediate plans for a feasibility study along the same lines as neighbours Everton, there are plenty who feel that a change of location will eventually become inevitable.

The rights and wrongs of abandoning The Kop traditions and relocating elsewhere would be one of the most emotive issues ever aired at a club that has known its share of emotional excesses over the years.

To the progressive thinkers at Anfield, it makes little commercial sense to carry on locking fans out of a 44,000-capacity stadium when sites are available to accommodate up to half as many again.

United currently cram 61,000 inside Old Trafford and bank in excess of £1million, after costs, every time they play at home. Further ground improvements will raise the limit to 68,000 for the start of next season and enable them to clear around £1.3m.

Liverpool stand to finish the campaign at least £15m adrift of their fierce rivals in terms of gate profits. That's the sort of handicap that manager Gerard Houllier is up against in trying to build a squad to compare with Sir Alex Ferguson's.

A steady rise to second place and the prospect of Champions League football next season suggest that the Frenchman has got the foundations in place during his 18 months in sole charge. And the signing of Emile Heskey from Leicester for £11m was a clear statement of intent.


Liverpool without Anfield..... Any comments? Neutral?

While it's nothing official (but I've read a similar article at TeamTalk) I'm still in shock - I can't imagine Liverpool playing their home games anywhere else than Anfield -can u? I can't imagine going anywhere else This is very sad, hopefully they can find a way to just expand the stadium further - but they lost a lot of capacity because of the Taylor report in the early 90s - especially when they had to change the Kop to all seater (all stadiums had to be changed, but the Kop end was HUGE!!!). I'm not sure about expanding the Main Stand or the Centenary Stand (both would be difficult), but the Kop has a higher capacity than the Anfield Road end - so I guess they could start by expanding the Anfield Road end first.
I don't know, maybe moving is just inevitable - Arsenal will be leaving Highbury for a new facility - but will these grounds have the same aura and the same magic as Anfield or Highbury?
Look at Ajax when they moved into their wonderful new stadium a few years back - a lot of people complained the atmosphere wasn't the same.
Nothing's official, hopefully Liverpool can finish 2nd this season and get into the Champions League which should provide them with a lot of cash and tv money so they won't have to move, or they could use the cash to try to expand the stadium further.

(Oh by the way, the article got the capacity wrong, Anfield can hold 45,000 not 44,000)

[This message has been edited by Neutral (edited 04-25-2000).]

Hm.. how about a joint stadium with Everton? =PP j/k.

If LFC decide to move the stadium, then so be it. Although as you say, Neutral, the aura and the charm of Anfield won't be there. What more can you say.

How much do big teams depend on attendance for revenue? I know that teams in the States make most of their money from TV. The only attendance the NBA (basketball) teams care about are luxury boxes that cost over $1,000 per game per seat. Does Anfield have these type of boxes? Do other stadiums? Please educate me.

Well lets not exaggerate, the gate receipts are still very important to most teams in USA. It is true some teams in big markets like the Yankees get 50 million per year just for their local tv contract, but there is no such thing in England like a local tv contract!

To go back to the original questions, I think they should make everything possible to stay at Anfield, but if they want to expand why not re-build the existing, like the Yankees did with their stadium in 1975? They can play at Goodison park in the meantime...

[This message has been edited by PolishPower (edited 04-25-2000).]

I really feel for liverpool fans.
We had (and still have) the same problem in Paris: They wanted the PSG to play at the big stade de France but the fans wanted to stay at the Parc des Princes. Finally, the PSG got to stay in its old stadium but for how long? I think it is a sacrifice to pay if you want to be competitive. No-one said it would be easy.