Reasons Not To Leave The County Ground Site

[THE FLASH]

I just know any new ground built in a field 5 miles from the centre of town will be a bitter disappointment.  We'd have to call it the 'I Can't Believe it's Not Better' Stadium.

I have my coat.

Good!

[pauld]

The first bit I don't think stacks up when you consider the experience of other clubs. Just about every club that's relocated into a new ground has seen attendances increase.

Just not true. While it's worked well for some, it's been a disaster for others - the "if you build it, they will come" mantra while widely hawked about does not hold. It's worked for some, but only where they've put the work in to also make the football more attractive, make the new stadium a community hub etc. Just building a new ground, then sitting back and waiting for the crowds to show up doesn't work - the classic case in point is Darlington who've been completely FUBARed by their 25000 seater white elephant or our friends up the A420 where the carrot of a new ground was used to nigh on asset strip them. Quite legally, I should add.

[Lumps]

Just not true. While it's worked well for some, it's been a disaster for others - the "if you build it, they will come" mantra while widely hawked about does not hold. It's worked for some, but only where they've put the work in to also make the football more attractive, make the new stadium a community hub etc. Just building a new ground, then sitting back and waiting for the crowds to show up doesn't work - the classic case in point is Darlington who've been completely FUBARed by their 25000 seater white elephant or our friends up the A420 where the carrot of a new ground was used to nigh on asset strip them. Quite legally, I should add.

Darlington is a piss poor example and you know it. A club that's been 4th division for virtually it's entire history, with support around the 4500 mark, taken over by a crook who conned everyone into thinking they were about to sign Gazza and Tino Asprilla, built a massively oversized tribute to his ego in a 25,000 seated stadium and then took the club into administration and fucked off before being knicked with £500,000 in the boot of his car, and sent down for 3 years for tax evasion. It's a bit of a special case isn't it?

Oxford were just plain legally gutted by Kassam. They were on their upperrs and he sensed an opportunity. It's not the new ground that screws them it's the club don't own it or any of the other revenue streams that it creates. If Kassm had actually wanted to run a footabll club it could have done wonders for them.

Deloittes study suggests generally positive outcomes but its clear that initial additional revenue has to be invested on the pitch to bring a bit of success in order to sustain growth. And the study is a bit limited and slanted towards the Prem.

http://www.deloitte.com/dtt/press_release/0,1014,sid%253D2834%2526cid%253D167402,00.html

I'm still fairly convinced that the majority of clubs do get an attendance boost from redevelopment, and definately get a revenue boost from e commercial opportunities. I'm just hoping we don't have to go down that road.

[pauld]

Generally yes, but I was just saying it's not necessarily the case that new ground automatically leads to improved crowds. You have to do the other stuff as well. I wouldn't argue that new/redeveloped grounds don't usually help in improving gates, I was more arguing against the simplistic assumption made by some fans and virtually all the media pundits that a new ground somehow guarantees improved gates by itself

[Lumps]

I think we're on the same page then. It's def not some sort of panacea, and my instinct is that is the additional commercial opportunities, corporate facilities, conference facilities and the like that make the difference to the way the things stack up financially rather than simply the increased gates.

I'd hope that when the club looks to think this stuff through they undertake a decent option appraisal process that does a detailed cost/benefit analysis of each option.

[Spencer_White]

We need 1 new stand for good corporate facilities. We dont need to rip up the whole place and move to a field.

New football grounds are a long term investment. They should be judged over decades, not a couple of seasons. I dont know if youve noticed, but the whole 'debt is good' mantra that many businesses have run on for the last 10 years is no longer viable.

New grounds could yet come back to cripple some clubs. Some it was needed, but what about Coventry? Perfectly good ground they had there already? Same as there is nothing wrong with the CG. Some were relics, like the Manor, but not all.

[Arnold.J.Rimmer]

Same as there is nothing wrong with the CG.

Nothing wrong with the Don Rogers stand. The rest of the ground needs to be rebuilt if we're ever going to compete above League 1.

[Spencer_White]

As regards competing in the league above, lets just see what happens in the next 5 years? Its going to catch up with quite a few clubs in the Championship.

[Ardiles]

There are a few interesting posts from Reading fans talking about their ground and the experience of supporting Reading since the move from Elm Park in the thread below.  Go to the bottom of the page and start reading from the post by Dan-87.

Reading fans' view of the Madejski

I don't think I've heard a better argument for not going down the out-of-town stadium route.

[Batch]

Also interesting is the less than enthusiastic view on getting into the premier league.

[reeves4england]

Also interesting is the less than enthusiastic view on getting into the premier league.

Yep, it's kind of a view I agree with too. I'd love to see us work our way up there and to get the coverage from TV etc, but all the crap that comes with it such as an influx of overrated foreign prima donnas and plastic supporters makes it seem much less attractive

[Spencer_White]

Look at Southampton now. The new stadium is an lead weight around their neck.

They were able to get to safety so many seasons at the Dell. Its a matter of opinion but that extra intensity and atmosphere of playing somewhere like the Dell helped get them over the line.

'Nothing wrong with the Don Rogers stand. The rest of the ground needs to be rebuilt if we're ever going to compete above League 1' - in your opinion. The team gets you places, not new seats. What about all the bollocks written about Fratton park before Pompey got in the Premiership?

[reeves4england]

There is only 1 benefit to be gained from us having a new ground, and that is the potential financial gains from the facilities that would be included in it. I don't see how it could improve atmosphere or anything like that.

[Rich Pullen]

It would be silly to want major redevelopment or a move for the sake of it. In fairness, redevelopment isn't numero one on the list nowadays when once it seemed essential for our future.

I wonder how many more would turn up if we had a new stadium? Seems a weird reason to watch football. We would need a few consistantly good seasons before we could ever spend money on stadia.

[jonny72]

Look at Southampton now. The new stadium is an lead weight around their neck.

They were able to get to safety so many seasons at the Dell. Its a matter of opinion but that extra intensity and atmosphere of playing somewhere like the Dell helped get them over the line.

Playing in the Premier League with a capacity of 16k lost Southampton a fortune over the years. They never had any choice, redeveloping The Dell just wasn't an option so they had to move. Plus their new ground isn't much further away from the town centre than the old one.