Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 3, 2016 11:10:20 GMT
That's because you have to queue up twice for everything!!! Last May, Hot dog and chips please. You can get the hot dog here, but you'll need to walk down the concourse another 50yrds to that outlet over there to get your chips.........WHAT? Suly you arrive early and eat before - or leave late and eat after - who on earth wants to eat food in a fifteen minute break? The fat knackers?
|
|
|
Post by jungleboogie on Mar 3, 2016 11:13:55 GMT
That's because you have to queue up twice for everything!!! Last May, Hot dog and chips please. You can get the hot dog here, but you'll need to walk down the concourse another 50yrds to that outlet over there to get your chips.........WHAT? Suly you arrive early and eat before - or leave late and eat after - who on earth wants to eat food in a fifteen minute break? You do realise you don't have to eat and drink everything (and go to the loo) in that 15 minute window??? Do you give yourself second degree burns of the mouth in an effort to finish a pastie before kick off as you can't possible eat or drink once the match has kicked off?
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Mar 3, 2016 11:17:02 GMT
Given what Gasincider has suggested above I'm not sure we can be certain of that as, if they have, why weren't they aware of the serious problem that has now croped up? Is it the naming rights, the lack of a contract? They said they had talked to UWE several times before they bought the club. In any case they have always said that they need to negotiate a few things with UWE before the stadium can be built. I don't see Gasincider's info as anything new, merely a change of emphasis, ie they were chatting to a fan at the game, rather than addressing a press conference. I can't recall anybody ever suggesting recently there was a major problem over the UWE just rumours about potential issues, if they have been talks before then how did they overlook such a problem? It could be something blown our of proportion by the OP or a deal breaker, if the latter it could be 5 years before we get a new stadium, if ever, looking back at the last 20 -30 years of failed stadium projects!!
|
|
|
Post by supergas on Mar 3, 2016 11:19:56 GMT
For those wondering about the food and drink at the UWE, if it's built as a 21700 stadium here's how it will work (at the start anyway).
For each '?' thousand seats there will be x-number of toilets, y-number of food concessions and z-number of drink concessions. Even if we double attendances there will only be 'some' of those total things open on any given matchday - planning laws will dictate how many there have to be, commercial decisions will mean they won't all be open or even fitted out to start with...
....so long story short, there will still be queues at halftime, but on the plus-side you won't lose your spot on the terrace...
|
|
|
Post by mumbles on Mar 3, 2016 11:37:55 GMT
As for Wembley and the overspend, that was due to the builders multiplex. The FA had a fixed price contract. Shrewd business in my eyes. Must have saved them a fortune. You're right, I think there were three main problems with Wembley, firstly never choose the lowest price tender, don't tinker with the design once you've started and if you want cost and programme certainty don't design a bloody great arch which has never been done before. I can't believe Multiplex agreed to build that on a fixed price. The quote regarding the planning phase seems to suggest he's learnt some good lessons from Wembley which hopefully we can make use of.
|
|
|
Post by lpgas on Mar 3, 2016 11:53:42 GMT
I think that they are after owning the land, and some retail sites. I also think that they will go for the 26,000 option rather than 21,700, mainly because it is cheaper to build it straight in. Like the MK Dons ground. I am excited but a bit impatient too, having waited 47 years for a decent ground
|
|
|
Post by supergas on Mar 3, 2016 11:59:53 GMT
I think that they are after owning the land, and some retail sites. I also think that they will go for the 26,000 option rather than 21,700, mainly because it is cheaper to build it straight in. Like the MK Dons ground. I am excited but a bit impatient too, having waited 47 years for a decent ground Are they going to pay us all £18 per game to turn up rather than charge us £18 per game? I can't think of any other reason to build it at 21700 let alone 26000...
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Mar 3, 2016 13:04:09 GMT
I think that they are after owning the land, and some retail sites. I also think that they will go for the 26,000 option rather than 21,700, mainly because it is cheaper to build it straight in. Like the MK Dons ground. I am excited but a bit impatient too, having waited 47 years for a decent ground Problem is we can all do that but none of us know the issues facts at present
|
|
|
Post by lulworthgas on Mar 3, 2016 13:42:45 GMT
Stick a retractable roof on it. Can double up as bristols arena then! Now that the other one has been rejected by bcc. Would pay for itself in a few years!
|
|
|
Post by gaslife on Mar 3, 2016 14:20:05 GMT
I think that they are after owning the land, and some retail sites. I also think that they will go for the 26,000 option rather than 21,700, mainly because it is cheaper to build it straight in. Like the MK Dons ground. I am excited but a bit impatient too, having waited 47 years for a decent ground Are they going to pay us all £18 per game to turn up rather than charge us £18 per game? I can't think of any other reason to build it at 21700 let alone 26000... A huge problem with this club over the years has been the lack of ambition and acceptance of mediocrity of many supporters. Dare I say it, a trait of Bristolians in general (and I am one). North Bristol has a huge catchment of potential customers with money to spend who will be attracted to football and other events staged in comfortable modern facilities. The Al Qadi's can see this potential. It is a pity some Rovers fans cannot.
|
|
|
Post by Antonio Fargas on Mar 3, 2016 14:26:05 GMT
Are they going to pay us all £18 per game to turn up rather than charge us £18 per game? I can't think of any other reason to build it at 21700 let alone 26000... A huge problem with this club over the years has been the lack of ambition and acceptance of mediocrity of many supporters. Dare I say it, a trait of Bristolians in general (and I am one). North Bristol has a huge catchment of potential customers with money to spend who will be attracted to football and other events staged in comfortable modern facilities. The Al Qadi's can see this potential. It is a pity some Rovers fans cannot. Well, not really sure what the contentment with mediocrity of the average Gashead has to do with the progress of the team. Istm that being vaguely content to be in League 2 and supporting the team through it is actually encouraging. Not being content with it, and presumably moaning throughout the game and complaining, is less helpful. How does discontent turning into positive energy and getting things done actually manifest, coz that all sounds a bit like magical thinking to me. If only we were less tolerant of our failure we would be more successful, doesn't make a lot of sense.
|
|
|
Post by supergas on Mar 3, 2016 15:02:30 GMT
Are they going to pay us all £18 per game to turn up rather than charge us £18 per game? I can't think of any other reason to build it at 21700 let alone 26000... A huge problem with this club over the years has been the lack of ambition and acceptance of mediocrity of many supporters. Dare I say it, a trait of Bristolians in general (and I am one). North Bristol has a huge catchment of potential customers with money to spend who will be attracted to football and other events staged in comfortable modern facilities. The Al Qadi's can see this potential. It is a pity some Rovers fans cannot. Incidentally my comments are based on my hardwired dislike of the previous 'plans' by the previous board. 21700 was a number picked by South Gloucestershire Council, not us and was chosen to meet a political commitment not in any way related to us or our requirements. And so my point still stands, because the classic quote "If you build it, they will come" just doesn't ring true unless there are other changes....first of all, even when it's built and standing there (at either 21k or 26k), how is it filled? I can't for one minute imagine we will simply move the current 7500(ish) fanbase over. We will lose some and add some more....but how do we do that...? Slick marketing and the 'experience'? That'll add some fans and lose some others. Trouble is it will lose some of those who have (basically) kept us in existence and it risks losing some that currently make Bristol Rovers what it is... ...it's a fine line to tread and so far they're doing it right. I just hope they're not worried about how many seats they think we might need...
|
|
|
Post by jonwsm on Mar 3, 2016 15:29:24 GMT
Wasn't the original capacity going to be 21,700, and could be increased to 26,000 and 35,000 without any other planning application needed?
|
|
|
Post by Antonio Fargas on Mar 3, 2016 15:36:03 GMT
Wasn't the original capacity going to be 21,700, and could be increased to 26,000 and 35,000 without any other planning application needed? iirc the 26,000 can be done without extra pp, but not the 35,000.
|
|
|
Post by windy1 on Mar 3, 2016 15:47:49 GMT
And so my point still stands, because the classic quote "If you build it, they will come" just doesn't ring true unless there are other changes....first of all, even when it's built and standing there (at either 21k or 26k), how is it filled? I can't for one minute imagine we will simply move the current 7500(ish) fanbase over. We will lose some and add some more....but how do we do that...? Slick marketing and the 'experience'? That'll add some fans and lose some others. Trouble is it will lose some of those who have (basically) kept us in existence and it risks losing some that currently make Bristol Rovers what it is...
...it's a fine line to tread and so far they're doing it right. I just hope they're not worried about how many seats they think we might need...
[/quote]
And why can't we emulat Brighton? Average attendance in league 1 2008 5,937 Rovers in same league and year 6.850 Brighton in Championship in 2015 25,645
|
|
|
Post by justin blue on Mar 3, 2016 16:18:10 GMT
A huge problem with this club over the years has been the lack of ambition and acceptance of mediocrity of many supporters. Dare I say it, a trait of Bristolians in general (and I am one). North Bristol has a huge catchment of potential customers with money to spend who will be attracted to football and other events staged in comfortable modern facilities. The Al Qadi's can see this potential. It is a pity some Rovers fans cannot. Incidentally my comments are based on my hardwired dislike of the previous 'plans' by the previous board. 21700 was a number picked by South Gloucestershire Council, not us and was chosen to meet a political commitment not in any way related to us or our requirements. And so my point still stands, because the classic quote "If you build it, they will come" just doesn't ring true unless there are other changes....first of all, even when it's built and standing there (at either 21k or 26k), how is it filled? I can't for one minute imagine we will simply move the current 7500(ish) fanbase over. We will lose some and add some more....but how do we do that...? Slick marketing and the 'experience'? That'll add some fans and lose some others. Trouble is it will lose some of those who have (basically) kept us in existence and it risks losing some that currently make Bristol Rovers what it is... ...it's a fine line to tread and so far they're doing it right. I just hope they're not worried about how many seats they think we might need... Given that it's generally accepted that we have to move and we have a site that can house a 20k plus seater stadium it would make sense to build it. The new facilities will bring in bigger crowds initially, but success is what will keep them coming and bring in new support. If we are knocking on the door of the premiership do you think we will be struggling to fill a 21,000 seat stadium?.
|
|
|
Post by supergas on Mar 3, 2016 16:51:08 GMT
Incidentally my comments are based on my hardwired dislike of the previous 'plans' by the previous board. 21700 was a number picked by South Gloucestershire Council, not us and was chosen to meet a political commitment not in any way related to us or our requirements. And so my point still stands, because the classic quote "If you build it, they will come" just doesn't ring true unless there are other changes....first of all, even when it's built and standing there (at either 21k or 26k), how is it filled? I can't for one minute imagine we will simply move the current 7500(ish) fanbase over. We will lose some and add some more....but how do we do that...? Slick marketing and the 'experience'? That'll add some fans and lose some others. Trouble is it will lose some of those who have (basically) kept us in existence and it risks losing some that currently make Bristol Rovers what it is... ...it's a fine line to tread and so far they're doing it right. I just hope they're not worried about how many seats they think we might need... Given that it's generally accepted that we have to move and we have a site that can house a 20k plus seater stadium it would make sense to build it. The new facilities will bring in bigger crowds initially, but success is what will keep them coming and bring in new support. If we are knocking on the door of the premiership do you think we will be struggling to fill a 21,000 seat stadium?. Nope, I just worry about the plan to do it....for example, say the prices stay the same for three years but then massively jump when we reach the Championship...would we lose 2000 fans or gain 5000? Or both....
|
|
|
Post by womble on Mar 3, 2016 18:01:58 GMT
A huge problem with this club over the years has been the lack of ambition and acceptance of mediocrity of many supporters. Dare I say it, a trait of Bristolians in general (and I am one). North Bristol has a huge catchment of potential customers with money to spend who will be attracted to football and other events staged in comfortable modern facilities. The Al Qadi's can see this potential. It is a pity some Rovers fans cannot. Incidentally my comments are based on my hardwired dislike of the previous 'plans' by the previous board. 21700 was a number picked by South Gloucestershire Council, not us and was chosen to meet a political commitment not in any way related to us or our requirements. Actually South Glos were looking for a 20,000 capacity stadium. I am absolutely convinced that NH went for 21,700, because pre redevelopment, Ashton Gate had a capacity of 21,497.
|
|
|
Post by womble on Mar 3, 2016 18:04:46 GMT
Wasn't the original capacity going to be 21,700, and could be increased to 26,000 and 35,000 without any other planning application needed? iirc the 26,000 can be done without extra pp, but not the 35,000. 26,000 can be done without any major structural alterations, as everything is designed to carry the extra loads. It might still need planning permission though. 35,000 definitely would as it would involve significant changes.
|
|
|
Post by warehamgas on Mar 3, 2016 18:13:39 GMT
And so my point still stands, because the classic quote "If you build it, they will come" just doesn't ring true unless there are other changes....first of all, even when it's built and standing there (at either 21k or 26k), how is it filled? I can't for one minute imagine we will simply move the current 7500(ish) fanbase over. We will lose some and add some more....but how do we do that...? Slick marketing and the 'experience'? That'll add some fans and lose some others. Trouble is it will lose some of those who have (basically) kept us in existence and it risks losing some that currently make Bristol Rovers what it is... ...it's a fine line to tread and so far they're doing it right. I just hope they're not worried about how many seats they think we might need... And why can't we emulat Brighton? Average attendance in league 1 2008 5,937 Rovers in same league and year 6.850 Brighton in Championship in 2015 25,645[/quote] Agree with this and think you are probably correct. But am not too sure that Brighton is the best comparison. Brighton is a one club town with little opposition and only Crawley(!!), Pompey 50 miles to the west and Gillingham 70 miles to the east. Bristol with Rovers and City in direct opposition and Bristol Rugby is a different proposition. But I hope you're right. UTG!
|
|