|
Post by baggins on Apr 16, 2019 12:08:30 GMT
Thing is though, a 20k seater stadium at a new site is far more viable than a 15k seater stadium at the mem as it can be funded by the sale of the mem’s land, far better access routes for increased attendances and more space to build supporting developments which would lower the total cost to the club. I’m a really big fan of where the mem is situated with the Gloucester Road and all the pubs, some of that will no doubt be lost if we move to a new stadium out of town but if it’s a question of viability, a new stadium wins over redeveloping the mem every time. We would have concrete plans for the mem by now if it were otherwise. The mem would be feasible had consecutive boards not mothballed it. Consecutive? Going back how far?
|
|
|
Post by amgas on Apr 16, 2019 12:09:23 GMT
I love statements like this. The scale of our ambition has been much bigger than a few small permanent stands, we may not have got the schemes over the line but no lack of ambition. In fact perhaps too much ambition on schemes that have cost much more than a tin roof and a few seats.
Regardless, Family stand at Twerton was paid for by Rovers and is still very much permanent and in place.
I am not sure who paid for the huge north stand at Eastville in 1959 or indeed the new roof on the Tote end in 1961, of course not unreasonable for the stadium company to have done so given we were tenants, but the reason it was built was very much a result of Rovers success on the field at that time. On top of that we have two permanent roofs at the Mem which may have been funded by the fans, but are still permanent improvements. Since then the focus has clearly been on moving, so who would spend money on permanent structures ?
|
|
|
Post by chewbacca on Apr 16, 2019 12:17:07 GMT
The mem would be feasible had consecutive boards not mothballed it. From a design aspect, sure you could squeeze a 17,000 seater on the land if you agreed to many council restrictions and ignored the furore of local residents. But it is and and has always been, the second best option when taking the long term future of the club into account. If there really isn’t any site in the greater Bristol region for a new stadium or no willing partners, then redeveloping the mem is certainly something to look at, the club needs new infrastructure above all else. While I agree if we had two permanent structures on the South and West/East side we'd be less worried about a new stadium. The South Stand is 20 years old next season, that's an utter disgrace.
|
|
|
Post by chewbacca on Apr 16, 2019 12:18:04 GMT
The mem would be feasible had consecutive boards not mothballed it. Consecutive? Going back how far? Every board since the purchase of the Mem in 1998.
|
|
|
Post by chewbacca on Apr 16, 2019 12:21:47 GMT
I love statements like this. The scale of our ambition has been much bigger than a few small permanent stands, we may not have got the schemes over the line but no lack of ambition. In fact perhaps too much ambition on schemes that have cost much more than a tin roof and a few seats. Regardless, Family stand at Twerton was paid for by Rovers and is still very much permanent and in place. I am not sure who paid for the huge north stand at Eastville in 1959 or indeed the new roof on the Tote end in 1961, of course not unreasonable for the stadium company to have done so given we were tenants, but the reason it was built was very much a result of Rovers success on the field at that time. On top of that we have two permanent roofs at the Mem which may have been funded by the fans, but are still permanent improvements. Since then the focus has clearly been on moving, so who would spend money on permanent structures ? - The Family Stand at Twerton is a "temporary structure" and was paid for in part by an insurance pay out.
- The North Stand was paid for by the Supporters Club.
- The Tote End Roof by the Stadium Company.
- As you said the roofs and floodlights at the Mem were paid for by the supporters.
|
|
|
Post by faggotygas on Apr 16, 2019 12:29:34 GMT
I love statements like this. The scale of our ambition has been much bigger than a few small permanent stands, we may not have got the schemes over the line but no lack of ambition. In fact perhaps too much ambition on schemes that have cost much more than a tin roof and a few seats. Regardless, Family stand at Twerton was paid for by Rovers and is still very much permanent and in place. I am not sure who paid for the huge north stand at Eastville in 1959 or indeed the new roof on the Tote end in 1961, of course not unreasonable for the stadium company to have done so given we were tenants, but the reason it was built was very much a result of Rovers success on the field at that time. On top of that we have two permanent roofs at the Mem which may have been funded by the fans, but are still permanent improvements. Since then the focus has clearly been on moving, so who would spend money on permanent structures ? - The Family Stand at Twerton is a "temporary structure" and was paid for in part by an insurance pay out.
- The North Stand was paid for by the Supporters Club.
- The Tote End Roof by the Stadium Company.
- As you said the roofs and floodlights at the Mem were paid for by the supporters.
Is the Mem itself not a 'permanent structure' then? Or does it not count if you buy something that is already built?
|
|
|
Post by baggins on Apr 16, 2019 12:31:17 GMT
Consecutive? Going back how far? Every board since the purchase of the Mem in 1998. There's been a few variations on Boards, Members etc since then. You would have thought one would have it sorted by now.
|
|
|
Post by wertongas on Apr 16, 2019 12:35:13 GMT
one concern I have with a new stadium is the fact that everything we have looked at in the past has failed. Saying that we should have had two new stands at the Mem last summer one wouldn't fit in at the away end, the family stand was late going in because it had to be downsized and we ordered a screen last July, still not installed only the frame has been put up, yet Newport got theirs put in ok (why we couldn't their installer I don't know). Club applied for planning to convert three barns at The Colony but is was turned down because a report was missing. So what hope is there of the club ever building a new stadium! or major improvements to the Mem.
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Apr 16, 2019 12:36:30 GMT
Well I would rather see the club survive than put its future at risk with something that is not viable. Thing is though, a 20k seater stadium at a new site is far more viable than a 15k seater stadium at the mem as it can be funded by the sale of the mem’s land, far better access routes for increased attendances and more space to build supporting developments which would lower the total cost to the club. I’m a really big fan of where the mem is situated with the Gloucester Road and all the pubs, some of that will no doubt be lost if we move to a new stadium out of town but if it’s a question of viability, a new stadium wins over redeveloping the mem every time. We would have concrete plans for the mem by now if it were otherwise. Do you have any facts to support that view, as I've posted above we may get lucky and make £10m on the land transaction but that isn't going to build us a new stadium. I sense the situation is as it's always been in recent times there's just not sufficient money to fund a Mem redevelopment or a new stadium elsewhere. When the UK Government has recently had to underwrite a loan of just £250m to the Jordanian government to keep their economy form crashing I doubt we've any chance of the ALQ's finding £30m to build us a new ground. Perhaps it's time the ALQ's finally came clean with us?
|
|
|
Post by daniel300380 on Apr 16, 2019 12:53:18 GMT
Thing is though, a 20k seater stadium at a new site is far more viable than a 15k seater stadium at the mem as it can be funded by the sale of the mem’s land, far better access routes for increased attendances and more space to build supporting developments which would lower the total cost to the club. I’m a really big fan of where the mem is situated with the Gloucester Road and all the pubs, some of that will no doubt be lost if we move to a new stadium out of town but if it’s a question of viability, a new stadium wins over redeveloping the mem every time. We would have concrete plans for the mem by now if it were otherwise. Do you have any facts to support that view, as I've posted above we may get lucky and make £10m on the land transaction but that isn't going to build us a new stadium. I sense the situation is as it's always been in recent times there's just not sufficient money to fund a Mem redevelopment or a new stadium elsewhere. When the UK Government has recently had to underwrite a loan of just £250m to the Jordanian government to keep their economy form crashing I doubt we've any chance of the ALQ's finding £30m to build us a new ground. Perhaps it's time the ALQ's finally came clean with us? Not them themselves no, but they have never said they would. They have plenty of contacts all over the world though, lots with money, who like football. So with the right investors, they can still get us a new ground. It's obviously easier if someone has the money spare themselves though.
|
|
|
Post by chewbacca on Apr 16, 2019 12:56:01 GMT
- The Family Stand at Twerton is a "temporary structure" and was paid for in part by an insurance pay out.
- The North Stand was paid for by the Supporters Club.
- The Tote End Roof by the Stadium Company.
- As you said the roofs and floodlights at the Mem were paid for by the supporters.
Is the Mem itself not a 'permanent structure' then? Or does it not count if you buy something that is already built? Of course that counts, I should however have been more clear as I mine new permanent structure. Again however when you look at it in comparison to other EFL clubs it's pretty striking how far behind we are...
A Lack of Investment
|
|
|
Post by faggotygas on Apr 16, 2019 13:32:20 GMT
Is the Mem itself not a 'permanent structure' then? Or does it not count if you buy something that is already built? Of course that counts, I should however have been more clear as I mine new permanent structure. Again however when you look at it in comparison to other EFL clubs it's pretty striking how far behind we are...
A Lack of Investment
Well that's an arbitrary start date. On that list could be 1997 Bristol Rovers, and of all 4 sides of the Mem. It makes no difference if we built a stand ourselves or bought it from someone else, we're a football club, not a construction company. The proposition that we've not had an new stand since Tudor times are whatever is ludicrous, we bought a whole stadium.
We bought it for what, 2.5 million? Which with inflation is about £5million today.
|
|
|
Post by chewbacca on Apr 16, 2019 13:43:30 GMT
Of course that counts, I should however have been more clear as I mine new permanent structure. Again however when you look at it in comparison to other EFL clubs it's pretty striking how far behind we are...
A Lack of Investment
Well that's an arbitrary start date. On that list could be 1997 Bristol Rovers, and of all 4 sides of the Mem. It makes no difference if we built a stand ourselves or bought it from someone else, we're a football club, not a construction company. The proposition that we've not had an new stand since Tudor times are whatever is ludicrous, we bought a whole stadium.
We bought it for what, 2.5 million? Which with inflation is about £5million today.
So you're happy with the £2.5m investment in 84 years? I'm fully aware we're not a construction company, we're a football club. Football clubs at our level though cannot survive just being a football club...
|
|
|
Post by warehamgas on Apr 16, 2019 14:23:23 GMT
one concern I have with a new stadium is the fact that everything we have looked at in the past has failed. Saying that we should have had two new stands at the Mem last summer one wouldn't fit in at the away end, the family stand was late going in because it had to be downsized and we ordered a screen last July, still not installed only the frame has been put up, yet Newport got theirs put in ok (why we couldn't their installer I don't know). Club applied for planning to convert three barns at The Colony but is was turned down because a report was missing. So what hope is there of the club ever building a new stadium! or major improvements to the Mem. Only one concern? 😉 UTG!
|
|
|
Post by axegas on Apr 16, 2019 14:23:24 GMT
Thing is though, a 20k seater stadium at a new site is far more viable than a 15k seater stadium at the mem as it can be funded by the sale of the mem’s land, far better access routes for increased attendances and more space to build supporting developments which would lower the total cost to the club. I’m a really big fan of where the mem is situated with the Gloucester Road and all the pubs, some of that will no doubt be lost if we move to a new stadium out of town but if it’s a question of viability, a new stadium wins over redeveloping the mem every time. We would have concrete plans for the mem by now if it were otherwise. Do you have any facts to support that view, as I've posted above we may get lucky and make £10m on the land transaction but that isn't going to build us a new stadium. I sense the situation is as it's always been in recent times there's just not sufficient money to fund a Mem redevelopment or a new stadium elsewhere. When the UK Government has recently had to underwrite a loan of just £250m to the Jordanian government to keep their economy form crashing I doubt we've any chance of the ALQ's finding £30m to build us a new ground. Perhaps it's time the ALQ's finally came clean with us? Did I say it would be fully funded by the sale of the mem? A good proportion of it will but bringing partners on board to the project will be necessary to secure the full amount required for undertaking such a development. It can no doubt be done, just look at some of the other stadiums that are/have been built in the EFL. Not sure what you are trying to say in your second point about the Jordanian government? Russia and the UAE are hardly known for their fair and prosperous economies yet have been home to some of the largest investors in English Football in recent times. State wealth and private wealth are two very different things.
|
|
|
Post by faggotygas on Apr 16, 2019 14:27:03 GMT
Well that's an arbitrary start date. On that list could be 1997 Bristol Rovers, and of all 4 sides of the Mem. It makes no difference if we built a stand ourselves or bought it from someone else, we're a football club, not a construction company. The proposition that we've not had an new stand since Tudor times are whatever is ludicrous, we bought a whole stadium.
We bought it for what, 2.5 million? Which with inflation is about £5million today.
So you're happy with the £2.5m investment in 84 years? I'm fully aware we're not a construction company, we're a football club. Football clubs at our level though cannot survive just being a football club... Don't get me wrong, I'm not. It's the 'haven't spent any money since 1812' thing that I object to. The 2.5 million or whatever was a lot of money to us then.
|
|
|
Post by chewbacca on Apr 16, 2019 14:29:36 GMT
So you're happy with the £2.5m investment in 84 years? I'm fully aware we're not a construction company, we're a football club. Football clubs at our level though cannot survive just being a football club... Don't get me wrong, I'm not. It's the 'haven't spent any money since 1812' thing that I object to. The 2.5 million or whatever was a lot of money to us then. The Mem cost less than the aggregate funds we received for 2 players in the two years from 1996 to 1998.
|
|
|
Post by faggotygas on Apr 16, 2019 14:39:37 GMT
Don't get me wrong, I'm not. It's the 'haven't spent any money since 1812' thing that I object to. The 2.5 million or whatever was a lot of money to us then. The Mem cost less than the aggregate funds we received for 2 players in the two years from 1996 to 1998. Is that net? Were we profitable in those years?
|
|
|
Post by gashead1981 on Apr 16, 2019 14:42:50 GMT
I would also note that the clubs that you have mentioned who have had new stadiums but haven't benefited from them that mostly, it was because the club was poorly run at the top, the owners went bankrupt themselves or quite frankly they built far beyond their means. Coventry, Darlington, Chester all had financial difficulties as a result of poor ownership. MK Dons are a club with delusions of grandeur and chesterfield were the main architects of their own downfall and regardless of the stadium they were playing in, would have found themselves relegated anyway. If you look at Darlington for example, their owner was a crook, and when they built the stadium, they were restricted to 10k in attendance because of poor access roads unless special permission was granted. They were only averaging 4k a week a Fleethams anyway. Total madness. If you look at Brighton, Swansea and to an extreme, Rotherham as examples you can see what a new stadium can do for you. Not sure why Darlington are ever discussed when it comes to our stadium as it was never going to be viable and you wonder how it even got pp. Back to your suggestion we pay £10m for land for a new stadium but sell the Mem site for £30m, I can't see how those figures stack up, Horfield is hardly a prime development hot spot and Sainsbury's were prepared to offer £10m over any other developer at the time to secure the deal, if it was still worth £30m on the open market why didn't NH forget Sainsbury's and sell to another development co? Unless we move right out of town to somewhere like Avonmouth, I can't see we're going to make £20m selling the Mem then buying an alternative development site, perhaps on a good day we could make £10m but that's not going to fund a new stadium. Topper, you get obsessed of what NH and the previous board didn't do and forget that, when the ALQ's came in, there was a cast iron promise from Hani that the stadium would get built, thats why they did not pursue any other options post Sainsbury's, they pursued with selling the club. I personally saw plans for one plan b option, of which the company who drew them made a solid offer on the site. I was led to believe there was one other developer who had made an offer too. There is much more finance to be drawn than just from the sale of your site. There are grants available to all football league clubs which have a maximum reward of £6m from the FA. The commercial contracts from shops, gyms, casinos, nurseries or whatever commercial venture you have along side it generate the capital to build. You don't qualify for anyway near the amount of the grant just for a stand by stand development and you would be limited by what you can build on the mem site. Thats how you make the figures stack.
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Apr 16, 2019 15:40:27 GMT
Not sure why Darlington are ever discussed when it comes to our stadium as it was never going to be viable and you wonder how it even got pp. Back to your suggestion we pay £10m for land for a new stadium but sell the Mem site for £30m, I can't see how those figures stack up, Horfield is hardly a prime development hot spot and Sainsbury's were prepared to offer £10m over any other developer at the time to secure the deal, if it was still worth £30m on the open market why didn't NH forget Sainsbury's and sell to another development co? Unless we move right out of town to somewhere like Avonmouth, I can't see we're going to make £20m selling the Mem then buying an alternative development site, perhaps on a good day we could make £10m but that's not going to fund a new stadium. Topper, you get obsessed of what NH and the previous board didn't do and forget that, when the ALQ's came in, there was a cast iron promise from Hani that the stadium would get built, thats why they did not pursue any other options post Sainsbury's, they pursued with selling the club. I personally saw plans for one plan b option, of which the company who drew them made a solid offer on the site. I was led to believe there was one other developer who had made an offer too. There is much more finance to be drawn than just from the sale of your site. There are grants available to all football league clubs which have a maximum reward of £6m from the FA. The commercial contracts from shops, gyms, casinos, nurseries or whatever commercial venture you have along side it generate the capital to build. You don't qualify for anyway near the amount of the grant just for a stand by stand development and you would be limited by what you can build on the mem site. Thats how you make the figures stack. Even if NH was daft enough to accept a promise after getting stitched by Sainsbury's when he thought he had a watertight contract selling the club for £6m when it's major asset was worth £30m makes no sense, plus wasn't the deal forced though by the other board members anyway?
|
|