|
Post by chewbacca on Feb 28, 2024 14:29:25 GMT
With all due respect of the 92 clubs currently in the EFL 76 have built new stands and stadiums since we moved back to Bristol. Failures of board, after board, after board have left us lagging behind with Legoland Chernobyl. Folk need to raise their expectations rather than being so bloody passive. What's the point of raising our expectations, that's not going to get us a new stadium? How about we should be thankful we're actually getting some improvements at the Mem after 20+ years of waiting?
|
|
|
Post by singupgas on Feb 28, 2024 14:50:55 GMT
If we waited out being bought by someone who's got the funds to build a Wembley in Horfield we'd be waiting for eternity. This is what I mean about unrealistic expectations. I doubt there's many on here who've not waited their lifetimes for a decent stadium for the Gas. Following the bit by bit extension strategy will probably see all of us sitting in a home stadium far better than we ever have before. With all due respect of the 92 clubs currently in the EFL 76 have built new stands and stadiums since we moved back to Bristol. Failures of board, after board, after board have left us lagging behind with Legoland Chernobyl. Folk need to raise their expectations rather than being so bloody passive. Agreed, the fans that don't expect more and a board that won't develop us in the ways necessary with a modern football stadium, training ground will see us return to league 2, worse out of the football league again.
|
|
|
Post by chewbacca on Feb 28, 2024 14:55:56 GMT
With all due respect of the 92 clubs currently in the EFL 76 have built new stands and stadiums since we moved back to Bristol. Failures of board, after board, after board have left us lagging behind with Legoland Chernobyl. Folk need to raise their expectations rather than being so bloody passive. Agreed, the fans that don't expect more and a board that won't develop us in the ways necessary with a modern football stadium, training ground will see us return to league 2, worse out of the football league again. I think the club paying for the first permanent structure for the club since they built the Tote End isn't a big ask.
|
|
|
Post by albaron on Feb 28, 2024 15:09:28 GMT
Agree with pretty much all this. No reason why the middle ground cant give short term viability and longer term revenue generation as well as improved facilities and more seats. And the Mem is never going to be a perfect looking ground, but I dont mind it being still very individual - just much better than it is! Absolutely. Personally - I'd rather a ground with history and a story to its appearance than a soulless new build bowl that looks pretty much identical throughout. It's hard not to get romantic about your Anfields and Old Traffords. Your Emirates and Etihads are boring in comparison. Disagree with you there. First of all Anfield is a totally different ground to the Anfield from when we visited . So no real history there. Old Trafford is falling down and need a complete re-vamp. Nothing wrong in either the Emirates or Etihad. Both great grounds. And with regards closer to home I would sooner be playing at Ashton Gate as opposed to the Mem. At least at AG they have decent toilets, nice bars and the ground is not falling down.
|
|
|
Post by kampucheagas on Feb 28, 2024 15:12:56 GMT
Absolutely. Personally - I'd rather a ground with history and a story to its appearance than a soulless new build bowl that looks pretty much identical throughout. It's hard not to get romantic about your Anfields and Old Traffords. Your Emirates and Etihads are boring in comparison. Disagree with you there. First of all Anfield is a totally different ground to the Anfield from when we visited . So no real history there. Old Trafford is falling down and need a complete re-vamp. Nothing wrong in either the Emirates or Etihad. Both great grounds. And with regards closer to home I would sooner be playing at Ashton Gate as opposed to the Mem. At least at AG they have decent toilets, nice bars and the ground is not falling down. Smells of poo though UTG
|
|
|
Post by gas2 on Feb 28, 2024 15:15:31 GMT
At least the new owner is kerping us informed with what is going on within the club he's more upfont with us i think he's aware about the logistics of the ground in its position
|
|
|
Post by faggotygas on Feb 28, 2024 15:50:28 GMT
Agreed, the fans that don't expect more and a board that won't develop us in the ways necessary with a modern football stadium, training ground will see us return to league 2, worse out of the football league again. I think the club paying for the first permanent structure for the club since they built the Tote End isn't a big ask. Never understand this argument. The club paid for a pair of permanent stands, a pitch and a car park in 1996.
|
|
|
Post by gasandelectricity on Feb 28, 2024 15:52:13 GMT
Absolutely. Personally - I'd rather a ground with history and a story to its appearance than a soulless new build bowl that looks pretty much identical throughout. It's hard not to get romantic about your Anfields and Old Traffords. Your Emirates and Etihads are boring in comparison. Disagree with you there. First of all Anfield is a totally different ground to the Anfield from when we visited . So no real history there. Old Trafford is falling down and need a complete re-vamp. Nothing wrong in either the Emirates or Etihad. Both great grounds. And with regards closer to home I would sooner be playing at Ashton Gate as opposed to the Mem. At least at AG they have decent toilets, nice bars and the ground is not falling down. But Ashton Gate and Anfield are still stadiums built in a classical format. Neither are new build bowls they’ve been renovated piecemeal. Even part of Ashton Gates last renovation one of the stands was extended and revamped rather than a knock down and rebuild. Some are quick to praise the quality of Ashton Gate on here but poo poo the idea of doing similar in our stadium?!
|
|
|
Post by singupgas on Feb 28, 2024 15:56:46 GMT
Disagree with you there. First of all Anfield is a totally different ground to the Anfield from when we visited . So no real history there. Old Trafford is falling down and need a complete re-vamp. Nothing wrong in either the Emirates or Etihad. Both great grounds. And with regards closer to home I would sooner be playing at Ashton Gate as opposed to the Mem. At least at AG they have decent toilets, nice bars and the ground is not falling down. But Ashton Gate and Anfield are still stadiums built in a classical format. Neither are new build bowls they’ve been renovated piecemeal. Even part of Ashton Gates last renovation one of the stands was extended and revamped rather than a knock down and rebuild. Some are quick to praise the quality of Ashton Gate on here but poo poo the idea of doing similar in our stadium?! Yeah I think you are missing the point somewhat, the south stand and what has been mentioned as the plans for the East stand are nothing like AG. Lets not kid ourselves. We would be happy to have a ground like the Teds, but we are putting up pillars in places and talking about bolting on ends to stands that need to be demolished.
|
|
|
Post by badengas on Feb 28, 2024 16:17:34 GMT
Disagree with you there. First of all Anfield is a totally different ground to the Anfield from when we visited . So no real history there. Old Trafford is falling down and need a complete re-vamp. Nothing wrong in either the Emirates or Etihad. Both great grounds. And with regards closer to home I would sooner be playing at Ashton Gate as opposed to the Mem. At least at AG they have decent toilets, nice bars and the ground is not falling down. But Ashton Gate and Anfield are still stadiums built in a classical format. Neither are new build bowls they’ve been renovated piecemeal. Even part of Ashton Gates last renovation one of the stands was extended and revamped rather than a knock down and rebuild. Some are quick to praise the quality of Ashton Gate on here but poo poo the idea of doing similar in our stadium?! Poo Poo, Ashton Gate, LOL. Sorry.
|
|
|
Post by bidefordgas on Feb 28, 2024 16:20:54 GMT
I think the club paying for the first permanent structure for the club since they built the Tote End isn't a big ask. Never understand this argument. The club paid for a pair of permanent stands, a pitch and a car park in 1996. Paid a peanuts sum to buy the ground from a bankrupt joint owner, the rugby club. The only significant development since the fans financed the roof over the clubhouse terrace is the new South stand.
|
|
|
Post by chewbacca on Feb 28, 2024 16:39:52 GMT
I think the club paying for the first permanent structure for the club since they built the Tote End isn't a big ask. Never understand this argument. The club paid for a pair of permanent stands, a pitch and a car park in 1996. Then let it rot.
|
|
|
Post by ifollowgas on Feb 28, 2024 16:40:47 GMT
Never understand this argument. The club paid for a pair of permanent stands, a pitch and a car park in 1996. Paid a peanuts sum to buy the ground from a bankrupt joint owner, the rugby club. The only significant development since the fans financed the roof over the clubhouse terrace is the new South stand. From Wikipedia: " . .. In 1996, Bristol Rovers moved in as tenants of Bristol Rugby Club, and then entered into joint ownership through the Memorial Stadium Company. After just two years, in 1998, the rugby club was relegated from the Premiership (causing them severe financial difficulties) and under the terms of the agreement Bristol Rovers were able to buy Bristol Rugby's share of the stadium for a 'nominal fee', a clause designed to protect either party should one or the other fall into financial difficulties. .." Can anyone remember the fee paid by the BRFC directors for the joint ownership of the ground (circa 1996-7) and later the 'nominal fee' for outright ownership?
|
|
|
Post by gasandelectricity on Feb 28, 2024 16:42:53 GMT
But Ashton Gate and Anfield are still stadiums built in a classical format. Neither are new build bowls they’ve been renovated piecemeal. Even part of Ashton Gates last renovation one of the stands was extended and revamped rather than a knock down and rebuild. Some are quick to praise the quality of Ashton Gate on here but poo poo the idea of doing similar in our stadium?! Yeah I think you are missing the point somewhat, the south stand and what has been mentioned as the plans for the East stand are nothing like AG. Let’s not kid ourselves. We would be happy to have a ground like the Teds, but we are putting up pillars in places and talking about bolting on ends to stands that need to be demolished. Not really. Everyone’s having a meltdown when we haven’t even seen the plans yet. If it’s more of the like of the south stands then go back to having a meltdown. However my point is that we don’t know what they’re going to share. With the right investment the East Stand could make for a quality stand.
|
|
|
Post by womble on Feb 28, 2024 16:53:11 GMT
Paid a peanuts sum to buy the ground from a bankrupt joint owner, the rugby club. The only significant development since the fans financed the roof over the clubhouse terrace is the new South stand. From Wikipedia: " . .. In 1996, Bristol Rovers moved in as tenants of Bristol Rugby Club, and then entered into joint ownership through the Memorial Stadium Company. After just two years, in 1998, the rugby club was relegated from the Premiership (causing them severe financial difficulties) and under the terms of the agreement Bristol Rovers were able to buy Bristol Rugby's share of the stadium for a 'nominal fee', a clause designed to protect either party should one or the other fall into financial difficulties. .." Can anyone remember the fee paid by the BRFC directors for the joint ownership of the ground (circa 1996-7) and later the 'nominal fee' for outright ownership? From memory, £2.3m for a 50% share of the Memorial Stadium Company (set up as a vehicle for joint ownership), and a £10,000 buy out clause should either party go into receivership.
|
|
|
Post by aghast on Feb 28, 2024 17:19:10 GMT
My expectations are what I expect, by definition. Not what I dream of. They don't need raising. And since the owner has said we're not building a new stand, why would anyone have any expectations that we are?
I think, if the 'wings' are identical to the existing stand, it could look ok. Plenty of room to build behind the stand for new bars, hospitality and corporate events.
The seating replacing the terraces will be a bit exposed to the elements, but I'm pretty sure the Dolman stand had a modest roofline extension when they built the new rows of seating down to the pitch.
|
|
|
Post by stuart1974 on Feb 28, 2024 17:51:58 GMT
My expectations are what I expect, by definition. Not what I dream of. They don't need raising. And since the owner has said we're not building a new stand, why would anyone have any expectations that we are? I think, if the 'wings' are identical to the existing stand, it could look ok. Plenty of room to build behind the stand for new bars, hospitality and corporate events. The seating replacing the terraces will be a bit exposed to the elements, but I'm pretty sure the Dolman stand had a modest roofline extension when they built the new rows of seating down to the pitch. I'm expecting more a Dolman Stand makeover look than a Lansdown Stand. Should still be decent, though.
|
|
|
Post by stuart1974 on Feb 28, 2024 17:52:20 GMT
From Wikipedia: " . .. In 1996, Bristol Rovers moved in as tenants of Bristol Rugby Club, and then entered into joint ownership through the Memorial Stadium Company. After just two years, in 1998, the rugby club was relegated from the Premiership (causing them severe financial difficulties) and under the terms of the agreement Bristol Rovers were able to buy Bristol Rugby's share of the stadium for a 'nominal fee', a clause designed to protect either party should one or the other fall into financial difficulties. .." Can anyone remember the fee paid by the BRFC directors for the joint ownership of the ground (circa 1996-7) and later the 'nominal fee' for outright ownership? From memory, £2.3m for a 50% share of the Memorial Stadium Company (set up as a vehicle for joint ownership), and a £10,000 buy out clause should either party go into receivership. That's my recollection too.
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Feb 28, 2024 18:03:34 GMT
Perhaps you could go out and find a local billionaire prepared to pay £100m out of his savings to rebuild the Mem, otherwise just accept whatever the ALS decide to build is the best we're going to get, as nobody else is going to do any better, Wael didn't even get as far as building a stand, or at least completing the job.
|
|
|
Post by ifollowgas on Feb 28, 2024 18:06:27 GMT
From memory, £2.3m for a 50% share of the Memorial Stadium Company (set up as a vehicle for joint ownership), and a £10,000 buy out clause should either party go into receivership. That's my recollection too. Was part of the land sold for housing after BRFC/MSC gained outright ownership? If so when and how much was the land sold for? Was this money used to compensate Directors for purchase of the original 50% share of the ground?
|
|