|
Post by oldmarket65 on Dec 20, 2022 17:17:42 GMT
Personally I'm not worried if we stay or go. However: I do feel a decision needs to be made a date set. This as been going on since 1997 with the plan of replacing stand by stand at the Mem. Personally I am very cautious about the risk factors of moving. I'm also aware that we need someone to pay for it. We have countless plans down at the council all approved and signed off. This is why I been saying for years and years. It would be more realistic to apply to EFL for a grant to build a modest stand and evaluate it a year or so after. We need a solution now !. We've got countless plans for a new Stadium all aporoved and signed off? Really? If you go on the council website . We have had at least 4 projects approved at the Mem since 1997 if not more. I have no faith what so ever we will build a new stadium. Also who will pay for a major revamp at the Mem ?. The only option I see is a modest stand to improve the facilities. We could apply for funding via EFL stadia . It's the less risky and realistic way forward. It feels the two other options ( new stadium / major revamp ) are pipedreams !.
|
|
|
Post by baggins on Dec 20, 2022 17:32:58 GMT
We've got countless plans for a new Stadium all aporoved and signed off? Really? If you go on the council website . We have had at least 4 projects approved at the Mem since 1997 if not more. I have no faith what so ever we will build a new stadium. Also who will pay for a major revamp at the Mem ?. The only option I see is a modest stand to improve the facilities. We could apply for funding via EFL stadia . It's the less risky and realistic way forward. It feels the two other options ( new stadium / major revamp ) are pipedreams !. And these planning permissions are still valid? Didn't know that.
|
|
|
Post by Gastafari on Dec 20, 2022 17:49:07 GMT
It's a decent home ground fortress, but it's not only an embarrassment but it's a few months away from being not fit for purpose. Twerton Park was the real embarrassment. In comparison the Mem is Goodison Park to Woking! I don't think it was. There were plenty of other clubs who played in grounds no different to Twerton really. Wimbledon & Oxford perfect examples who both played in the top flight and won FA and League Cups. Completely different times. The Mem now isn't fit for purpose at all imo.
|
|
|
Post by oldmarket65 on Dec 20, 2022 17:51:08 GMT
If you go on the council website . We have had at least 4 projects approved at the Mem since 1997 if not more. I have no faith what so ever we will build a new stadium. Also who will pay for a major revamp at the Mem ?. The only option I see is a modest stand to improve the facilities. We could apply for funding via EFL stadia . It's the less risky and realistic way forward. It feels the two other options ( new stadium / major revamp ) are pipedreams !. And these planning permissions are still valid? Didn't know that. You still don't understand my point ?. The issue isn't planning : approval or feasibility. It's the reliance on either ' third parties' or ' additional backers to fund it. We have been successful in 20 odds years in putting together excellent projects . So much so the cross party councillors have all backed them at the councils . The old chestnut is ' who pays for it ' Is it viable ? . Is it self funding ?. This is a historical problem at our club. We don't have persons who are willing to pay for it if ' third parties ' pull out. Its not a criticism. Therefore : I would be very cautious in spending one more penny on plans: studies processes. I would save the money and part fund it towards a new stand with the hope of grants and fundraising initiatives.
|
|
|
Post by justin blue on Dec 20, 2022 20:36:17 GMT
And these planning permissions are still valid? Didn't know that. You still don't understand my point ?. The issue isn't planning : approval or feasibility. It's the reliance on either ' third parties' or ' additional backers to fund it. We have been successful in 20 odds years in putting together excellent projects . So much so the cross party councillors have all backed them at the councils . The old chestnut is ' who pays for it ' Is it viable ? . Is it self funding ?. This is a historical problem at our club. We don't have persons who are willing to pay for it if ' third parties ' pull out. Its not a criticism. Therefore : I would be very cautious in spending one more penny on plans: studies processes. I would save the money and part fund it towards a new stand with the hope of grants and fundraising initiatives. I don’t think there are stadia grants for EFL clubs anymore. I think the grants are only for clubs entering the football league and the National leagues.
|
|
|
Post by eric on Dec 20, 2022 20:51:21 GMT
You still don't understand my point ?. The issue isn't planning : approval or feasibility. It's the reliance on either ' third parties' or ' additional backers to fund it. We have been successful in 20 odds years in putting together excellent projects . So much so the cross party councillors have all backed them at the councils . The old chestnut is ' who pays for it ' Is it viable ? . Is it self funding ?. This is a historical problem at our club. We don't have persons who are willing to pay for it if ' third parties ' pull out. Its not a criticism. Therefore : I would be very cautious in spending one more penny on plans: studies processes. I would save the money and part fund it towards a new stand with the hope of grants and fundraising initiatives. I don’t think there are stadia grants for EFL clubs anymore. I think the grants are only for clubs entering the football league and the National leagues. Could we swap a Josh Grant for a ground improvement Grant?
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Dec 20, 2022 21:32:07 GMT
You still don't understand my point ?. The issue isn't planning : approval or feasibility. It's the reliance on either ' third parties' or ' additional backers to fund it. We have been successful in 20 odds years in putting together excellent projects . So much so the cross party councillors have all backed them at the councils . The old chestnut is ' who pays for it ' Is it viable ? . Is it self funding ?. This is a historical problem at our club. We don't have persons who are willing to pay for it if ' third parties ' pull out. Its not a criticism. Therefore : I would be very cautious in spending one more penny on plans: studies processes. I would save the money and part fund it towards a new stand with the hope of grants and fundraising initiatives. I don’t think there are stadia grants for EFL clubs anymore. I think the grants are only for clubs entering the football league and the National leagues. I've never seen it mentioned in the BP etc we've missed out on grants buy not developing the stadium in the past. Although it's a bit irrelevant if we're showing no signs of developing the Mem nor building a new stadium.
|
|
|
Post by percy on Dec 21, 2022 8:52:56 GMT
TBH I've always dreamed of a shiny new ground, but getting to the age where I dont think i will see it whilst still able to attend and I would miss the location and atmosphere of the Mem. So I am now all for a mem upgrade, to keep the atmosphere but increase capacity to about 15K and improve the facilities I know the arguments against btw. No need to re-state them
|
|
|
Post by gasandelectricity on Dec 21, 2022 18:00:19 GMT
I posted the cover of Groundhog Day yesterday not being 100% facetious.
The discussion has been done to death but it doesn’t change a thing. No matter how much we discuss it without making major alterations to the Mem we’re not going to get anything substantial.
Best we can hope for is perhaps conversion of some terraces to seating. Perhaps a slightly bigger tent.
But without major development we won’t see extensions of the east stand and the club just isn’t going to do it. Why? The argument has again been done to death. The Mem isn’t going to be any cheaper than a new site (new build is more efficient and land sale offsets purchase of new land) and we won’t be able to get it to pay back in the same way.
Moreso, the site at the Mem won’t ever let us expand beyond 18-20k. Some might be happy with that but if we have ambition we need to start at that figure and have scope to expand should we need to. Staying at the Mem and renovating it is planning to forever be in the shadow of our neighbours. Personally, I’m far from happy about that.
|
|
|
Post by dexygas on Dec 21, 2022 18:16:21 GMT
I posted the cover of Groundhog Day yesterday not being 100% facetious. The discussion has been done to death but it doesn’t change a thing. No matter how much we discuss it without making major alterations to the Mem we’re not going to get anything substantial. Best we can hope for is perhaps conversion of some terraces to seating. Perhaps a slightly bigger tent. But without major development we won’t see extensions of the east stand and the club just isn’t going to do it. Why? The argument has again been done to death. The Mem isn’t going to be any cheaper than a new site (new build is more efficient and land sale offsets purchase of new land) and we won’t be able to get it to pay back in the same way. Moreso, the site at the Mem won’t ever let us expand beyond 18-20k. Some might be happy with that but if we have ambition we need to start at that figure and have scope to expand should we need to. Staying at the Mem and renovating it is planning to forever be in the shadow of our neighbours. Personally, I’m far from happy about that. I agree with everything you have said. But there is one thing you have not considered: TIME.
We have not built a new structure at any of our grounds for 70 years. There are clubs who have built, knocked down and built again in that time.
We have been spending money on plans and applications since 1974 (49 years ago).
We have been at The Mem for 26 years and have no plans to move or build anything.
There does come a point when someone has to say that our track record suggests that we are not going to go anywhere for at least 20 years so we might as well build something at The mem in the meantime.
|
|
|
Post by oldmarket65 on Dec 21, 2022 18:31:07 GMT
I posted the cover of Groundhog Day yesterday not being 100% facetious. The discussion has been done to death but it doesn’t change a thing. No matter how much we discuss it without making major alterations to the Mem we’re not going to get anything substantial. Best we can hope for is perhaps conversion of some terraces to seating. Perhaps a slightly bigger tent. But without major development we won’t see extensions of the east stand and the club just isn’t going to do it. Why? The argument has again been done to death. The Mem isn’t going to be any cheaper than a new site (new build is more efficient and land sale offsets purchase of new land) and we won’t be able to get it to pay back in the same way. Moreso, the site at the Mem won’t ever let us expand beyond 18-20k. Some might be happy with that but if we have ambition we need to start at that figure and have scope to expand should we need to. Staying at the Mem and renovating it is planning to forever be in the shadow of our neighbours. Personally, I’m far from happy about that. I agree with everything you have said. But there is one thing you have not considered: TIME.
We have not built a new structure at any of our grounds for 70 years. There are clubs who have built, knocked down and built again in that time.
We have been spending money on plans and applications since 1974 (49 years ago).
We have been at The Mem for 26 years and have no plans to move or build anything.
There does come a point when someone has to say that our track record suggests that we are not going to go anywhere for at least 20 years so we might as well build something at The mem in the meantime.
Absolutely spot on !. And how much have these plans / legal work costs the club ? Maybe £ 3 _ 5 million over the last 20 years. Once again we could spend a few million and end up with nothing. This money could of built one decent stand which is a starting point. I rather we use any funds in the future on definite work rather than gambling work. Besides our fans deserve at least one stand which would be a first in 60 years.
|
|
|
Post by gasandelectricity on Dec 21, 2022 18:33:31 GMT
I posted the cover of Groundhog Day yesterday not being 100% facetious. The discussion has been done to death but it doesn’t change a thing. No matter how much we discuss it without making major alterations to the Mem we’re not going to get anything substantial. Best we can hope for is perhaps conversion of some terraces to seating. Perhaps a slightly bigger tent. But without major development we won’t see extensions of the east stand and the club just isn’t going to do it. Why? The argument has again been done to death. The Mem isn’t going to be any cheaper than a new site (new build is more efficient and land sale offsets purchase of new land) and we won’t be able to get it to pay back in the same way. Moreso, the site at the Mem won’t ever let us expand beyond 18-20k. Some might be happy with that but if we have ambition we need to start at that figure and have scope to expand should we need to. Staying at the Mem and renovating it is planning to forever be in the shadow of our neighbours. Personally, I’m far from happy about that. I agree with everything you have said. But there is one thing you have not considered: TIME.
We have not built a new structure at any of our grounds for 70 years. There are clubs who have built, knocked down and built again in that time.
We have been spending money on plans and applications since 1974 (49 years ago).
We have been at The Mem for 26 years and have no plans to move or build anything.
There does come a point when someone has to say that our track record suggests that we are not going to go anywhere for at least 20 years so we might as well build something at The mem in the meantime.
That’s like saying we’ve not beaten Charlton at the Valley since 1958 so we may as well just go there and hold out for a draw. Im glad Joey saw that as an opportunity and not a reason for capitulation. Trends are there to be broken. Whilst we shouldn’t be unrealistic and hold out for something that might never happen, it doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t set reaching goals and go for something that sets up the club for the future and should instead waste money on a ground that will never match our ambitions. Staying put is far more unrealistic than aiming for a new stadium elsewhere.
|
|
|
Post by Midsomer Murderer on Dec 21, 2022 18:55:37 GMT
As a young man, I spent many a wonderful Saturday at Twerton and enjoyed the success under Gerry Francis we had at there. However, I went to the friendly there before this season and it really is a dump compared to the Mem.
|
|
|
Post by dexygas on Dec 21, 2022 21:06:37 GMT
"Staying put is far more unrealistic than aiming for a new stadium elsewhere"
The point I am making is that the rate we have gone in the last 70 years we could do both.
|
|
|
Post by playtowin on Dec 22, 2022 11:18:47 GMT
Quickest solution.
Get rid of car parking except for those we are obliged to provide by league rules. Put temporary bars etc in the car park.
Demolish existing north stand roof and buildings behind. Build seating over existing terrace then extend back. Have bar built into new stand.
This will provide a 4-5000 seated stand. Juggled correctly it might only disrupt six months .
This i believe is the only way to upgrade the mem whilst staying on site.
After this is completed it allows more flexibility on redeveloping other parts of the ground.
|
|
|
Post by baggins on Dec 22, 2022 12:27:15 GMT
Quickest solution. Get rid of car parking except for those we are obliged to provide by league rules. Put temporary bars etc in the car park. Demolish existing north stand roof and buildings behind. Build seating over existing terrace then extend back. Have bar built into new stand. This will provide a 4-5000 seated stand. Juggled correctly it might only disrupt six months . This i believe is the only way to upgrade the mem whilst staying on site. After this is completed it allows more flexibility on redeveloping other parts of the ground. Got a feeling it's been mentioned that any development of the Mem is a no go?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 22, 2022 12:41:21 GMT
Quickest solution. Get rid of car parking except for those we are obliged to provide by league rules. Put temporary bars etc in the car park. Demolish existing north stand roof and buildings behind. Build seating over existing terrace then extend back. Have bar built into new stand. This will provide a 4-5000 seated stand. Juggled correctly it might only disrupt six months . This i believe is the only way to upgrade the mem whilst staying on site. After this is completed it allows more flexibility on redeveloping other parts of the ground. Got a feeling it's been mentioned that any development of the Mem is a no go? That can only be because there isn't a will to do so or there is a better option being considered.
|
|
|
Post by gashead1981 on Dec 22, 2022 12:44:17 GMT
A mem redevelopment is totally unviable from a ROI perspective.
What everyone who clamours for a Mem redevelopment assumes is that matchday revenue is all we need to pay for it, which, when you think that we dont break even as a football club now, in fact we make £3m losses, do you honestly think that we can afford another £70m in debt to get a new stadium and never pay for it?
Thats the absolute reality. To make a return on your £70m in a time frame that would be realistic for investors we would have to sub out the stadium for multiple non footballing events. The Mem's very location means that we wouldnt be able to house any form of loud nighttime entertainment such as gigs, concerts or shows. Any form of industrial would be a no go due to its proximity with housing and none of gloucester road will have us putting shops on there. There isnt much call for any form of hotel in the area either so the Mem is literally pigeon holed into being a sports ground, which the neighbours hate anyway.
Whats the point in any form of stand redevelopment when the only solution is to move and sell the existing ground anyway? Youll never recoup the spend.
Its not a case of not wanting to do anything, or not being able to afford to do anything, its just a pointless exercise when the possibility of a new stadium in the next 5-10 years where we get exactly what we want/need is worth waiting for.
|
|
|
Post by baggins on Dec 22, 2022 12:51:45 GMT
Got a feeling it's been mentioned that any development of the Mem is a no go? That can only be because there isn't a will to do so or there is a better option being considered. I just don't think it's a lack of will to do so, but it's a lack of Financial return on the investment.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 22, 2022 13:22:22 GMT
A mem redevelopment is totally unviable from a ROI perspective. What everyone who clamours for a Mem redevelopment assumes is that matchday revenue is all we need to pay for it, which, when you think that we dont break even as a football club now, in fact we make £3m losses, do you honestly think that we can afford another £70m in debt to get a new stadium and never pay for it? Thats the absolute reality. To make a return on your £70m in a time frame that would be realistic for investors we would have to sub out the stadium for multiple non footballing events. The Mem's very location means that we wouldnt be able to house any form of loud nighttime entertainment such as gigs, concerts or shows. Any form of industrial would be a no go due to its proximity with housing and none of gloucester road will have us putting shops on there. There isnt much call for any form of hotel in the area either so the Mem is literally pigeon holed into being a sports ground, which the neighbours hate anyway. Whats the point in any form of stand redevelopment when the only solution is to move and sell the existing ground anyway? Youll never recoup the spend. Its not a case of not wanting to do anything, or not being able to afford to do anything, its just a pointless exercise when the possibility of a new stadium in the next 5-10 years where we get exactly what we want/need is worth waiting for. Fully understand the ROI argument but the original scheme to redevelop The Mem was to get others to enable the development which has worked at similar stadia. It's rare for an owner, Bristol City were one, where the owner dips into its own pocket to provide the funding. Barry Hearn isn't stupid and during a conversation he explained how the main grandstand would possibly never get rebuilt as he had run out of corners to build a block of flats on which paid to rebuild the rest of the stadium. Stoke City boast how they built a stadium for nothing. The cost was £15m. Britannia paid £10.5m for 10 years of naming rights and the FA granted £4.5m in grants. It is possible with a little thinking outside of the box.
|
|