But then again, the first chance they get of a ‘ground share’ opportunity they would jump at it. These people would have no qualms about doing that if it suited there business ends and there was economic benefit in it. Even with no source I would bet they have explored the possibility of it?

Ground sharing will not work in the UK and should never happen. Its a dangerous precendent if it occurs at a high level or at any level at all.

Use of Jets-Giants ground share may be relevant in the USA where different attitudes, club history and traditions exist but not here in UK where the historical attachment and emotional belonging to a home ground will ensure that every team generally has its ‘own home.’ Even if a club chose to join up and ground share it would soon move back to building a ground of its own meaning more money.

As such the movement towards ‘new grounds’ in the UK has been one that has destroyed the traditional atmosphere that was once within stadia. Gone are traditonal home ends such as ‘Gallowgate’ at Newcastle; Kippax at Man City and the old Stretford End full of colour, song, bonhomie and flags and what we have now are soul-less cesspits with very little colour, dumbed down atmospheres with replica shirts which are security health and safety zone creations full of useless penants.

I agree the cycle of ground share ideals in countries such as Italy are coming to an end perhaps. Torino want/dream of a return to its original home (one of them) and Espanyol are back at the Sarria. Milan clubs generally been same place in modern era, whilst Allianz (as mentioned) is not really a ground share. Many TSV 1860 fans want back to the old ground or to play at Unterhachings ground. St.Pauli would not go to the AOL/Nordbank.

Any movement towards grounds share ideas in UK is another move towards business not paying one bit of notice at what ‘real fans’ think and want.

Also, Everton fans hate Liverpool football club…really hate them and have an emotional attachment to Goodison like very few fans do to a home ground. They really dislike the club and a movement away from Goodison to share with them or even the mention of it would truly mean that football in England has gone to the dogs. Mention it to Evertonians and the people suggesting it will get death threats.

The failed FC Limburg project in Holland saw the mention of Fortuna Sittard being liquidated and moving to Roda Kerade’s ground. This was a business inspired idea for ‘cost cutting’ ideals and again led to both sets of fans wrecking the ground, issuing death threats to owners and project leaders. It was abandoned by the people who mentioned it.

Incidently Dundee and Dundee United fans also hate each other with a passion as do Hearts and Hibs fans. The present grounds are redeveloped and the fans are quite happy where they are. Any movement to a new ground would see fans disappearing quickly all be it maybe a few hundred and increased tensions between fans.

Scotland bidding for 2012 is a pipe dream that wont happen. It is a deluded Scottish government inspired marketing scheme latched onto by Gordon Smith the SFA Chief as it improves the look of his CV. Scotland is too small a country and lacks the whole package needed to host a high profile tournament. Edinburgh/Glasgow can host an event as venues and suggesting a new ground in Dundee was one idea of selling the idea of Dundee as a venue but the thought of top nations competing in a major tournament in such as parochial small place as Dundee (Klagenfurt at least was picturesque) is just ridiculous.

Its no co-incidence that the people who mentioned a joint Everton-Liverpool ground were American owners who are hated by just about every traditional Liverpool fan.

If ground shares happen in the UK, it will be a time of despair for many fans. We have suffered enough here because of modern football..no more change please!

One club can both build it’s image and financial stability around a stadium, while renting it from a municipality (like Italy, Poland or Japan) or sharing unequally (there is no equal sharing, even with 50/50 share one club gets more of it) makes a team loose part of or all their extra-use profit, sponsor attractivness and sporting image. Plus, I doubt there is a situation anywhere in the world, where two clubs have the same marketing potential and fanbase for a stadium to fully suit both.

So one always is or becomes the weaker one, like TSV 1860 who couldn’t fill Allianz Arena for more than 2-4 games per season I think. They were far from using the potential of the ground thus making them the ones with less benfits. The ground was also built way below the potential of Bayern which was planning an 80k stadium (and by their attendances at the AA noone can doubt they needed one). So Allianz Arena is a compromise that proves to be both too small for Bayern and too large for TSV at the same time. In what way can anyone judge that as anything positive or even more – a success? Not to mention the ever unprofitable largest parking in Europe just next to it…

And anyone who gives Italy as an example of a ground sharing viability is a laugh. Their stadiums, whether we speak of Rome, Milan or Genoa, are all old and/or built without any other non-sporting uses in mind which makes the clubs earn almost solely on matchday revenues. They cannot manage the ground to maximise profits for their club as they are always either slowed down by the other club or the municipality. That’s far from a healthy situation and probably that’s why we’ve already heard of all six club in mention (not sure about Genoa though, it might be that only Sampdoria planned a move) trying to escape from that situation by building a ground of their own. So if Italian clubs intend to drop the scheme, how can it be described as “working”?

While we may see a rise in the number of lower league teams investing in a shared stadium I think it will be a long time before we ever see a it happening in the Premiership. Even though the example of Everton and Liverpool was mentioned I really cannot see it happening in the near future.

Alasdair

It’s also interesting that the Jets were never happy sharing Giants Stadium previously, and were looking for their own stadium in Manhattan — only when these plans fell through did they turn to a ‘ground-share’.

Still, if it succeeds, it would definitely encourage the bigger clubs in England to try something similar — and it’s in a different stratosphere as an example to the increasingly decrepit Milanese example, for sure.

Fans don’t have to bow to economic realities, but teams do.
As for advertising/sponsorships in the stadium, the teams should work together as get twice the amount from the sponsors and split that up. Or just set up a shell company to manage the stadium for both teams. It shouldn’t be the end of the world.
Teams are used to having their own stadiums, but that was back in the day, when top flight teams didn’t require 50,000 plus seats with god knows how many luxury suites and club seats. 4 separate stands and a concessions from a truck won’t cut it anymore.