Pages: 1 2 [3] 4   Go Down
Print
Author Topic: What's fresh with these new plans?  (Read 8524 times)
pauld
Aaron Aardvark

Offline Offline

Posts: 25436


Absolute Calamity!




Ignore
« Reply #30 on: Sunday, April 9, 2006, 09:57:53 »

Bit of a shame you couldn't make any of the meetings we've had on the subject Reg as you're obviously bursting with ideas on it. FWIW, I'd say a 3-sided 10,000-seat stadium (apart from the fact that it pretty much dooms us to permanently being in the bottom two divisions in perpertuity) would not be acceptable to either the club or to what the council would like to do in terms of providing community sports/leisure facilities. You only get the chance to do something like this once in a generation, if that, it would be a shame to limit the opportunities for both the club and the town through lack of ambition.
Logged
Dazzza

Offline Offline

Posts: 8265



WWW
« Reply #31 on: Sunday, April 9, 2006, 16:42:02 »

What's the score with the recently mentioned rent increase mentioned at the recent cross party meeting?

There was talk of a rent increase to subsidise any land the Council potentially hand over.  It did look to be based upon the original plans with all of the proposed housing but is it likely to be something the Council will push for under the new blueprint?

I’d have hoped that free rent like other clubs have negotiated with local authorities could possibly have been on the cards but it looks highly unlikely.  The only possibility I can see is if the club and council develop joint community facilities on site and then come to some arrangement.
Logged

Reg Smeeton
Walking Encyclopaedia

Offline Offline

Posts: 34913





Ignore
« Reply #32 on: Sunday, April 9, 2006, 18:02:36 »

Quote from: "pauld"
Bit of a shame you couldn't make any of the meetings we've had on the subject Reg as you're obviously bursting with ideas on it. FWIW, I'd say a 3-sided 10,000-seat stadium (apart from the fact that it pretty much dooms us to permanently being in the bottom two divisions in perpertuity) would not be acceptable to either the club or to what the council would like to do in terms of providing community sports/leisure facilities. You only get the chance to do something like this once in a generation, if that, it would be a shame to limit the opportunities for both the club and the town through lack of ambition.


   As things stand at the moment, sustaining the club in the lower two divisions looks like an ambition the current board wont be able to deliver.

  We need to be realistic.....if the aim is for income generators on the CG footprint in order to sustain some level of pro football something will have to go.

  Some sort of apartment blocks where the Stratton Bank used to be, overlooking the pitch and Extension....could be quite lucrative.
Logged
pauld
Aaron Aardvark

Offline Offline

Posts: 25436


Absolute Calamity!




Ignore
« Reply #33 on: Sunday, April 9, 2006, 20:53:56 »

Quote from: "Reg Smeeton"
Quote from: "pauld"
You only get the chance to do something like this once in a generation, if that


As things stand at the moment, sustaining the club in the lower two divisions looks like an ambition the current board wont be able to deliver.

That's the problem in a nutshell with the "10,000 is all we'll need" approach. You may well be right that 10,000 is likely to be ample for the next few seasons and it may well be realistic to say we'll be farting about in the lower divisions for as much as the next four/five years. But, if you limit the capacity to 10,000, then that's all you're aiming for, for the next 25-30 years. You're saying to any future ambitious up-and-coming manager, or bright young prospect looking for a solid side to carve out the next step on his career (or impress in a one-year loan deal) "Don't bother looking at us - we're a small-town club with no ambition. Go to Walsall [insert own preferred choice of unglamorous potential rival here] instead".

If you're doing a stadium redevelopment, you don't get the chance to do it very often so what you do and how you do it is important. And if you allow your ambition to be limited by short-term pessimism, you'll likely fulfill your own prophecy - build a 10,000 seater and I'd pretty much guarantee we will just bumble around the lower leagues in perpetuity. But I don't think most of the fans want that, the council doesn't want that and the club don't want that.

I understand the point you're making Reg, but I think you've allowed the current gloomy situation (by which I mean not just this season but for at least the last 5 years) to cloud the potential of what we could achieve as a town and as a club. And, if we were to go down the "Northampton-stylee nice little ground" route, to kill that potential for a generation.
Logged
Reg Smeeton
Walking Encyclopaedia

Offline Offline

Posts: 34913





Ignore
« Reply #34 on: Tuesday, April 11, 2006, 17:00:30 »

I appreciate what you're saying....but I think folk underestimate the depth of the crisis in which we find ourself.

 If the fans wanted more than a 10, 000 capacity ground then they'd turn up in the numbers to justify it....the notion that SBC want anything other than the demise of pro football in the Town and a lucrative development site is laughable.  As is the likelihood of the present incumbents of the Board room being able to deliver a bright shiny new future.....the immediate future will be about securing firstly league status and then some sort of pro football inthe Town

 We've had numerous opportunities in the last 30-40 years to create the type of club we'd all love to see...its this failure which has brought us to the current situation.

 Call me thick, but its my understanding that its roughly 1K a seat for new build...so a 10,000 capacity is going to cost 10 mill.....how os this to be paid for without some substantial othe rbuilding and where is it going if not inside the existing ground in some way.
Logged
reeves4england

Offline Offline

Posts: 16127


We'll never die!




Ignore
« Reply #35 on: Sunday, April 16, 2006, 22:28:37 »

Quote from: "Reg Smeeton"
I appreciate what you're saying....but I think folk underestimate the depth of the crisis in which we find ourself.

 If the fans wanted more than a 10, 000 capacity ground then they'd turn up in the numbers to justify it....the notion that SBC want anything other than the demise of pro football in the Town and a lucrative development site is laughable.  As is the likelihood of the present incumbents of the Board room being able to deliver a bright shiny new future.....the immediate future will be about securing firstly league status and then some sort of pro football inthe Town

 We've had numerous opportunities in the last 30-40 years to create the type of club we'd all love to see...its this failure which has brought us to the current situation.

 Call me thick, but its my understanding that its roughly 1K a seat for new build...so a 10,000 capacity is going to cost 10 mill.....how os this to be paid for without some substantial othe rbuilding and where is it going if not inside the existing ground in some way.
Sorry Reg but I'm going to have to disagree. If we build a new ground more people will come anyway. How many more I don't know but there will be new faces at the start. We need to hold on to these by impressing them ON the pitch and OFF. If we can do that there is no reason why 15,000 would be too big. Plus we need the extra capacity for big games which may not be regular but would provide much appreciate extra revenue. It would be such a shame to only get 10,000 in for a big cup game or a derby or whatever when we could easily have more.
Logged
Dazzza

Offline Offline

Posts: 8265



WWW
« Reply #36 on: Sunday, April 16, 2006, 22:36:02 »

Clubs that build new stadiums do increase attendances but it’s very short term unless there’s something to bother worth turning up to watch the tourists quickly head home.

You have to invest equally in the side as you do in the facilities to view them.  The playing side is so hacked back to the bone marrow at the moment unless there is speculative spending then we’ll continually cycle through seasons like this one.
Logged

RobertT

Offline Offline

Posts: 12321




Ignore
« Reply #37 on: Monday, April 17, 2006, 20:00:15 »

Quote from: "Reg Smeeton"
I appreciate what you're saying....but I think folk underestimate the depth of the crisis in which we find ourself.

 If the fans wanted more than a 10, 000 capacity ground then they'd turn up in the numbers to justify it....the notion that SBC want anything other than the demise of pro football in the Town and a lucrative development site is laughable.  As is the likelihood of the present incumbents of the Board room being able to deliver a bright shiny new future.....the immediate future will be about securing firstly league status and then some sort of pro football inthe Town

 We've had numerous opportunities in the last 30-40 years to create the type of club we'd all love to see...its this failure which has brought us to the current situation.

 Call me thick, but its my understanding that its roughly 1K a seat for new build...so a 10,000 capacity is going to cost 10 mill.....how os this to be paid for without some substantial othe rbuilding and where is it going if not inside the existing ground in some way.


Reg, the impression given is that development would be possible on the car park area and the green area towards the Magic Roundabout, subject to all the normal planning rules etc.  Most of the ideas relate to buildings that hug the current footprint, that's how it funds the £1.5k a seat (average, £1k quoted by Madjeski I think is a more basic cost, can be as much as £2.5k)
Logged
Duncan_Shearer

« Reply #38 on: Wednesday, May 3, 2006, 11:55:23 »

Quote from: "Reg Smeeton"
Quote from: "DV85"
extra capacity doesnt mean dead space....means we would pack more people in for say a concert.....might attract better acts because its a bigger venue etc


 We have one concert a year....nobody uses the bank for it. Next.


Who is this prick?
Logged
Reg Smeeton
Walking Encyclopaedia

Offline Offline

Posts: 34913





Ignore
« Reply #39 on: Wednesday, May 3, 2006, 16:00:00 »

Quote from: "Duncan_Shearer"
Quote from: "Reg Smeeton"
Quote from: "DV85"
extra capacity doesnt mean dead space....means we would pack more people in for say a concert.....might attract better acts because its a bigger venue etc


 We have one concert a year....nobody uses the bank for it. Next.


Who is this prick?


  DV ? A respected poster on this site.
Logged
Duncan_Shearer

« Reply #40 on: Thursday, May 4, 2006, 11:38:34 »

You know i meant you smart arse, you talk complete shit, how do you think clubs like Hull got their new stadium? Look at them now! They were in a worse financial position than what we find ourselves in. Now they are heading in the right direction. why? because of their stadium.

10,000? you having a laugh.
Logged
Batch
Not a Batch

Offline Offline

Posts: 57813





Ignore
« Reply #41 on: Thursday, May 4, 2006, 13:12:46 »

Quote from: "Duncan_Shearer"
You know i meant you smart arse, you talk complete shit, how do you think clubs like Hull got their new stadium? Look at them now! They were in a worse financial position than what we find ourselves in. Now they are heading in the right direction. why? because of their stadium.

10,000? you having a laugh.


Weren't Hull getting 10K+ after it was annonced they may go bust. This was way before the new stadium. Because their fans gave a damn.

Now we have fans that give a damn. But how many? I'd guess around 5000 and deminishing.

A new stadium is crucial for non-match day revenue, but a new stadium = diddly squat on gates anything after the immeadiate short term if things go badly on the pitch.
Logged
Dazzza

Offline Offline

Posts: 8265



WWW
« Reply #42 on: Thursday, May 4, 2006, 14:26:29 »

Quote from: "Duncan_Shearer"
You know i meant you smart arse, you talk complete shit, how do you think clubs like Hull got their new stadium? Look at them now! They were in a worse financial position than what we find ourselves in. Now they are heading in the right direction. why? because of their stadium.

10,000? you having a laugh.


I worked for Kingston around the time Hull's stadium was finished off Dunc and it's completely different to ourselves.

Hull basically got their stadium because Hull's council are rather minted especially when you compare them to SBC.  Plus on top of that they then got their own PLC to sponsor the whole package for a wedge of cash.

The price of land is pennies in the area as well and it's of combined use rugby, community and football which made it easier to get council funding.

They got a very, very sweet deal that's never going to happen in our circumstances but there's definitely some hope for us and a Stadium redevelopment.  

The proof though is going to be how the club manage to fund the development and still keep investors happy with a limited development and still come out of it at the end of the day with enough off the pitch revenue generators to make it worthwhile.
Logged

Iffy's Onion Bhaji
petulant

Offline Offline

Posts: 15863




Ignore
« Reply #43 on: Thursday, May 4, 2006, 17:36:00 »

another good example is Swansea. the council there forked out 27 mill on the liberty stadium! be nice if SBC did that rather than wasting 16 million pounds on a stupid flyover at commonhead  :-))(
Logged
pauld
Aaron Aardvark

Offline Offline

Posts: 25436


Absolute Calamity!




Ignore
« Reply #44 on: Thursday, May 4, 2006, 21:17:35 »

Quote from: "Rich"
another good example is Swansea. the council there forked out 27 mill on the liberty stadium! be nice if SBC did that rather than wasting 16 million pounds on a stupid flyover at commonhead  :-))(

Which might be a strong argument except the Highways Agency are paying for the flyover at Commonhead, not the council. Fact is Swansea, Darlo, Hull and other developments where councils have chipped in, they've been able to do so because there was demonstrable benefit to the local community, not just to the club. Which is what we've been trying to work towards and we seem to be making progress.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4   Go Up
Print
Jump to: