The Hippo Posted April 3, 2012 Report Share Posted April 3, 2012 As we have to have a rediculously large block free between home and away fans couldn't we re-introduce this fencing into the EE as a way to increasing the capacity? We did it for Cardiff in 04 with free blocks either side but im sure only Cardiff, Rovers etc would still need such a large gap in place. http://www.bcfc.co.uk/page/NewsDetail/0,,10327~374092,00.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Casual Connoisseur Posted April 3, 2012 Report Share Posted April 3, 2012 Stick another tier on the top, join it up to the Williams stand, which also could could benefit from another stand. Cheaper and easier than this bull shit up at AV! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan_BCFC Posted April 3, 2012 Report Share Posted April 3, 2012 Stick another tier on the top, join it up to the Williams stand, which also could could benefit from another stand. Cheaper and easier than this bull shit up at AV! +1 WIll look so much better, There is so much potential to redevelop Ashton gate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nebristolred Posted April 3, 2012 Report Share Posted April 3, 2012 And will also cost a lot more money and not give us as much revenue after. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Horse With No Name Posted April 3, 2012 Report Share Posted April 3, 2012 WOuld somebody please explain how a 30,000 Ashton Gate would fail to generate the same off field income than a 30,000 AV? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan Tansley Posted April 3, 2012 Report Share Posted April 3, 2012 WOuld somebody please explain how a 30,000 Ashton Gate would fail to generate the same off field income than a 30,000 AV? because it will remain a football stadium that is used 23 times a year. AV can be used 365 days. quite simple really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nebristolred Posted April 3, 2012 Report Share Posted April 3, 2012 WOuld somebody please explain how a 30,000 Ashton Gate would fail to generate the same off field income than a 30,000 AV? And to add to what the guy above said, a 30,000 Ashton Gate would involve a redeveloped East End + Williams Stand, so half of it would have decent off-the-field facilities. A new stadium would be able to generate revenue at all 4 sides of the ground. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 4, 2012 Report Share Posted April 4, 2012 because it will remain a football stadium that is used 23 times a year. AV can be used 365 days. quite simple really. As we will be one of its tenants, maybe you can explain where exactly the pot of gold will come from? and why it will come into our managers pocket rather than the AV investors? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted April 4, 2012 Report Share Posted April 4, 2012 WOuld somebody please explain how a 30,000 Ashton Gate would fail to generate the same off field income than a 30,000 AV? Ashton gate has no conferance facilities no boxes no corprate facilites only 2 stands with decent facilites, The cost of bringing Ashton Gate up to 25000 is about 45 million, We also don't have the 45 million we get from selling the land and lansdown will not pay fopr it on his own so unless you have 45 million in your back pocket burning a hole then forget it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Casual Connoisseur Posted April 4, 2012 Report Share Posted April 4, 2012 Ashton gate has no conferance facilities no boxes no corprate facilites only 2 stands with decent facilites, The cost of bringing Ashton Gate up to 25000 is about 45 million, We also don't have the 45 million we get from selling the land and lansdown will not pay fopr it on his own so unless you have 45 million in your back pocket burning a hole then forget it Very good points. The way we are going though, we may be better off selling AG and sharing the Mem, at least we'd fill it every week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted April 4, 2012 Report Share Posted April 4, 2012 Very good points. The way we are going though, we may be better off selling AG and sharing the Mem, at least we'd fill it every week. The only reason we are moving ground is the improvement in facilities more catering will increase match day revenue, More corprate will increase sponsership and mtachday revenue Bigger ground (which we all know will be shared with the rugby) will me more away fans (when we play teams like leeds) will mean more match day revenue The new ground will be up with the latest energy saving equpiment which will reduce ground running costs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nogbad the Bad Posted April 4, 2012 Report Share Posted April 4, 2012 The only reason we are moving ground is the improvement in facilities more catering will increase match day revenue, More corprate will increase sponsership and mtachday revenue Bigger ground (which we all know will be shared with the rugby) will me more away fans (when we play teams like leeds) will mean more match day revenue The new ground will be up with the latest energy saving equpiment which will reduce ground running costs We could have all of that with a redeveloped EE and Williams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nogbad the Bad Posted April 4, 2012 Report Share Posted April 4, 2012 Ashton gate has no conferance facilities no boxes no corprate facilites only 2 stands with decent facilites, The cost of bringing Ashton Gate up to 25000 is about 45 million, We also don't have the 45 million we get from selling the land and lansdown will not pay fopr it on his own so unless you have 45 million in your back pocket burning a hole then forget it Sounds a lot for 2 stands, where do you get that figure from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted April 4, 2012 Report Share Posted April 4, 2012 Sounds a lot for 2 stands, where do you get that figure from? the east end alone back in 2002 was quoted at 27 million, you have to take into account increase materials costs increased laber costs the closing of the stand for 12 months while the works are taking place, the location which isn't the easiest to get to, all kinds of crap really, Thats why most clubs move grounds instead of redvolping it costs a hell of alot more to redevlop instead of starting from scratch, Take chelsea it will cost more to redvolp stamford bridge then to move the same can be said about spurs or alot of inner city clubs, Clubs where ground are outside of a major city or have space like old trafford MK Dons etc its easier to exspand the stands buut then you need a wealthy backer to do that of your go down the darlington route Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beaverface Posted April 4, 2012 Report Share Posted April 4, 2012 Stick another tier on the top, join it up to the Williams stand, which also could could benefit from another stand. Cheaper and easier than this bull shit up at AV! -1 Double tiered stands have crap atmospheres ie. Ipswich and segregates the fans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nebristolred Posted April 4, 2012 Report Share Posted April 4, 2012 We could have all of that with a redeveloped EE and Williams. Not as effectively, as explained in many posts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frome Valley Posted April 4, 2012 Report Share Posted April 4, 2012 the east end alone back in 2002 was quoted at 27 million, you have to take into account increase materials costs increased laber costs the closing of the stand for 12 months while the works are taking place, the location which isn't the easiest to get to, all kinds of crap really, Thats why most clubs move grounds instead of redvolping it costs a hell of alot more to redevlop instead of starting from scratch, Take chelsea it will cost more to redvolp stamford bridge then to move the same can be said about spurs or alot of inner city clubs, Clubs where ground are outside of a major city or have space like old trafford MK Dons etc its easier to exspand the stands buut then you need a wealthy backer to do that of your go down the darlington route The single tier design was fa far less than that. An additional five thousands seats would not cost £5000 + per seat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
del ete Posted April 4, 2012 Report Share Posted April 4, 2012 The single tier design was fa far less than that. An additional five thousands seats would not cost £5000 + per seat. £7 million was quoted in 2005 I think, for the single tiered stand with 5k. The new Williams would have held 13,000 seats, I assume that would cost a great deal more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lack of Action Man Posted April 4, 2012 Report Share Posted April 4, 2012 because it will remain a football stadium that is used 23 times a year. AV can be used 365 days. quite simple really. So... a redevelopment of the Williams Stand and the East End, that perhaps included a restaurant, conference facilities and maybe a hotel, similar to the set up at Bramall Lane wouldn't be financially viable? Seriously I want the new stadium, but the reason Ashton Gate sucks for non football/business usage is that it is overpriced and marketed really really badly - not because it is completely incapable of hosting alternate events. Christ, the Dolman Bar must be amongst the biggest in the league! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nebristolred Posted April 4, 2012 Report Share Posted April 4, 2012 £7 million was quoted in 2005 I think, for the single tiered stand with 5k. The new Williams would have held 13,000 seats, I assume that would cost a great deal more. Lots more to redevelop the Williams. We'd have a reduced capacity meaning reduced income during matchdays, as well as having to move thousands of ST holders and the board members box, etc. No off-the-field facilities for nigh on a whole season. No VIP facilities for a whole season. The cost of building on an existing site is a lot higher. Zero expansion potential after (no room on Dolman side, no planning permission on Atyeo side). Even after expansion, still wouldn't have as much non-matchday revenue as a new stadium would. Current problems would still exist, and indeed would increase (lack of parking, no room around ground, etc). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nogbad the Bad Posted April 4, 2012 Report Share Posted April 4, 2012 Lots more to redevelop the Williams. No doubt, should have done it years ago. Still doable though. We'd have a reduced capacity meaning reduced income during matchdays, as well as having to move thousands of ST holders and the board members box, etc. That has happened without problems at numerous redeveloped grounds. I don't think moving the board members for a while is a significant problem. No off-the-field facilities for nigh on a whole season. What do you mean by facilities? There aren't many off field money spinners anyway. No VIP facilities for a whole season. That's not important to the average fan at all. The cost of building on an existing site is a lot higher. The cost of redeveloping the EE and the Williams is far less than a new ground. Zero expansion potential after (no room on Dolman side, no planning permission on Atyeo side). That's fine, expansion of the Atyeo wouldn't be needed to attain 25-27,0000, and the Dolman could be redeveloped in the future with a smaller capacity stand with improved exits. Even after expansion, still wouldn't have as much non-matchday revenue as a new stadium would. New conference facilities and executive boxes would be included, so what else do you mean? As for hotels etc., to what extent would the club actually benefit financially from them anyway? Current problems would still exist, and indeed would increase (lack of parking, no room around ground, etc). Are you suggesting people who drive to games at AV will be happy to spend an hour getting out of a massive car park after every match? I doubt it, most will be parking where they do now. The Braby site is (or was) available and the club could buy and incorporate that land. What we do know for an absolute certainty is that a redeveloped Ashton Gate is a feasible option because it remains the stated back up plan should AV not materialise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
screech Posted April 4, 2012 Report Share Posted April 4, 2012 Here's what I know about the new stadium at AV. We are selling AG for about £20m We are building AV for a reported £92m. Feel free to add the many bits I don't know about how we are making up the deficit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EstoniaTallinnRed Posted April 4, 2012 Report Share Posted April 4, 2012 Euro lottery win???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WellRedPhil Posted April 4, 2012 Report Share Posted April 4, 2012 And will also cost a lot more money and not give us as much revenue after. Priceless. You couldn't make it up. On the topic of revenue some people appear to believe that "non-matchday revenue" will be some sort of cash cow. Sure we'll make a few bob from conference halls and a hotel but it is not going to be anything like the figures some appear to believe. The main thing we would need to make AV a worthwhile investment for Bristol City Football Club is bums on seats, probably a minimum of 25,000. Anyone think we're going to be getting that anytime soon? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.