New Ground

[KeepUpLino]

Bolton, Middlesbrough and Sunderland make huge losses, or have at their new stadia. Stoke faced bankruptcy untill they were bought out. Leicester and Southampton nearly went out of business. Wigan exist at the level they do because of the largesse of their owner. Manchester City's expenditure on players is not serviced by their stadium. Cardiff had to be rescued by a ludicrous re-branding Malayasian ... Some of your examples are hardly models of excellence, and your points about actual and real profits shaky.

Sorry but this crap doesn't even deserve a decent answer..... What a load of shite!!!

[KeepUpLino]

spot on

How the **** can you compare bramall lane to Ashton gate hahaha WTF... My dads a blade, bramall lane is fantastic and to compare it with Ashton gate is an embarrassment!!!!

[Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan]

How the **** can you compare bramall lane to Ashton gate hahaha WTF... My dads a blade, bramall lane is fantastic and to compare it with Ashton gate is an embarrassment!!!!

Nobody is comparing AG to Bramall Lane apart from that fact that both are old grounds.

What are you banging on about?

[KeepUpLino]

Nobody is comparing AG to Bramall Lane apart from that fact that both are old grounds.

What are you banging on about?

Your right. I'm pissed and banging on :s

[The Casual Connoisseur]

It's been 5 years in planning & nada thus far.

Maybe be 2020 we will have something to talk about, until then it's all a big pipe dream.

[Timbo7]

According to Chambers "character" means the aggregate of peculiar qualities which constitutes personal or national [local perhaps?] individuality. Most would agree that the traditional football grounds of England, including Ashton Gate, plainly have this quality.

In contrast, new stadia almost by definition do not because, with very few exceptions, economics and the modern design ethos require that functional efficiency is King so that form follows function. Extreme examples of this can be seen at Middlesboro, Derby, Leicester, Reading and Southampton - all of which seem to have been designed by the same computer program with little if any human input (other than the colour of the seats). There are instances where the club or the planning authority have demanded a little more effort (at the expense of a degree of functionality) to create a design statement - Huddersfield, Bolton and Brighton - and as a consequence some impressive structures have been created but it can still hardly be called character.

The single notable exception I have seen is the Britannia, the design of which could generously be called "eccentric". However, a less charitable observer might say it looks like the plans got damaged in the rain after one end and one side had been built and the general foreman made up the other side and end in the hope that no one would notice. Having said that it must be said that in terms of noise and atmosphere the Britannia has left almost all the other new grounds in the shade.

On top of this Bolton, Wigan, Stoke, Huddersfield and Leicester have all overlooked the romantic significance of the stadium's name and have sold out to the highest bidder (as SL has indicated Bristol City will also do)

If we consider the published plans for Ashton Vale against this background we can see that effort has been made (in response to supporter consultation) to create a non-standard design but the result seems to be neither efficiently functional nor structurally impressive nor eccentric - in my view potentially the worst of all worlds. Coupled with a name like "Cash Converters" or "Poundstretcher" and a crowd of less than 50% capacity this future looks pretty bleak to me.

Did anyone else notice (when the fog lifted) how empty the Riverside looked last weekend with a 20,000 crowd? - imagine 10,000 watching our current team at Ashton Vale!

Finally, if it is right that we cannot stand in the way of "progress" and that Ashton Vale is more economically viable that re-development (which SL and Bristol City claim but seemingly decline to demonstrate) then all I would say is that we should all appreciate the full cost (and not just the financial cost) of leaving Ashton Gate behind. That said, if the Ashton Vale design was amended to incorporate a "safe standing" Spion Kop at the new East End this might just win me over.

[spudski]

According to Chambers "character" means the aggregate of peculiar qualities which constitutes personal or national [local perhaps?] individuality. Most would agree that the traditional football grounds of England, including Ashton Gate, plainly have this quality.

In contrast, new stadia almost by definition do not because, with very few exceptions, economics and the modern design ethos require that functional efficiency is King so that form follows function. Extreme examples of this can be seen at Middlesboro, Derby, Leicester, Reading and Southampton - all of which seem to have been designed by the same computer program with little if any human input (other than the colour of the seats). There are instances where the club or the planning authority have demanded a little more effort (at the expense of a degree of functionality) to create a design statement - Huddersfield, Bolton and Brighton - and as a consequence some impressive structures have been created but it can still hardly be called character.

The single notable exception I have seen is the Britannia, the design of which could generously be called "eccentric". However, a less charitable observer might say it looks like the plans got damaged in the rain after one end and one side had been built and the general foreman made up the other side and end in the hope that no one would notice. Having said that it must be said that in terms of noise and atmosphere the Britannia has left almost all the other new grounds in the shade.

On top of this Bolton, Wigan, Stoke, Huddersfield and Leicester have all overlooked the romantic significance of the stadium's name and have sold out to the highest bidder (as SL has indicated Bristol City will also do)

If we consider the published plans for Ashton Vale against this background we can see that effort has been made (in response to supporter consultation) to create a non-standard design but the result seems to be neither efficiently functional nor structurally impressive nor eccentric - in my view potentially the worst of all worlds. Coupled with a name like "Cash Converters" or "Poundstretcher" and a crowd of less than 50% capacity this future looks pretty bleak to me.

Did anyone else notice (when the fog lifted) how empty the Riverside looked last weekend with a 20,000 crowd? - imagine 10,000 watching our current team at Ashton Vale!

Finally, if it is right that we cannot stand in the way of "progress" and that Ashton Vale is more economically viable that re-development (which SL and Bristol City claim but seemingly decline to demonstrate) then all I would say is that we should all appreciate the full cost (and not just the financial cost) of leaving Ashton Gate behind. That said, if the Ashton Vale design was amended to incorporate a "safe standing" Spion Kop at the new East End this might just win me over.

Very eloquently put. And I concur with the majority of your sentiments. Thankyou for you thought out post.

To add to that, I personally don't like 'out of town' or 'Greenfield' new sites for stadiums.

Half the enjoyment of AG, is the neighbouring streets, houses, community, bars,shops and Restaurants. It all goes hand in hand.

This is why i would much prefer AG to be renovated in a sympathetic way to it's surroundings.

How nice it would be to see some bricks and mortar, rather than cheap looking cladding.

One of the reasons people are walking away from football, is because everything comes down to money.

People are fed up off reading and hearing money...money...money.

This is why i would quiet happily bob about in the Championship or League 1, than sell our soul to the footballing money train, in the mistaken world of 'progress', trying to live a pipe dream that pretty much every other club is trying to do.

There is no way ever that BCFC are going to be a Premier League side for more than a fleeting glance.

I really don't think the Bristol public are that interested and would support in numbers continually if it did ever happen.

Just my opinion, it's not negative.

I just see football in this country gradually dilluting itself into something that is grey and soulless...

[Timbo7]

It seems to remain the case that we are simply asked to believe (and it seems many do) that the proposed move to Ashton Vale is the only viable option for the future of Bristol City. As far as I can tell no business case has been presented, no options appraisal provided and no funding plan published either to shareholders, supporters or the public in general. Of course SL might argue that until and unless funding is sought from external sources it is entirely his prerogative to keep his plans to himself but to my mind at least such silence cannot be in the best interests of the club and its supporters. If the case for Ashton Vale is as overwhelming as some would have us believe what would be the harm in publishing a brief business case for our information?

In the light (or lack of light) of the wall of silence, history suggests we should remain unconvinced (see recent thread regarding 1982).

I currently have the following material questions:

1. who or what is Vence LLP? - evidently a special purpose company set up by SL & son to own the AV site but what (if anything) is its long-term role? - also if Vence owns the site why have development costs to date been incurred by Bristol City?
   
2. why does Vence LLP refer to Ashton Vale as "a new regional stadium" rather than "a new home for Bristol City"? - is this significant or just my paranoia?
   
3. how is the development to be funded? - solely as a gift from SL's fortune or (as is far more likely) a mixture of SL capital a debt secured on future non-football revenues (in which case such non-football revenues would be employed to service the debt rather than to support football activities
   
4. what, if any, return will SL (or other funders) demand on their "investment"?
   
5. why, if St Mary's was constructed for around £30M around 10 years ago, can't one side and one end of Ashton Gate be redeveloped for substantially less than £90M now (construction prices have stagnated since 2008)?
   

Absent any better information, and on the (probably misguided) assumption that the capital cost of the AV project will be funded entirely as a no-strings gift or a new Bristol City rights issue, I have make the following estimates:

1. 100 executive boxes could generate £2M/year in additional revenue (£20K each) if Bristol City can produce a mediocre Premier League team (or say £1M in the Championship / £500K in League 1);
   
2. a 200 seat conference centre running at 80% capacity all year round might generate around £1M/year; and
   
3. other activities that I haven't thought of - very optimistically perhaps another £2M/year
   

Ignoring the operating costs attached to these additional revenues (and assuming no return for investors) the AV development could therefore contribute an additional £5M/year as a contribution towards operating the Football Club. It should be noted at this point that a 5.5% (£5M/£90M) yield on a property investment is at the high end of what is achievable in the current market which suggests my estimates are very optimistic.

The problem is that the business lost nearly £12M in both of the last two years for which accounts have been published - i.e. even if my estimates are realistic the AV development (absent any substantial increase in attendances) will go less than half way towards meeting the current annual deficit and it will require average attendances to rise by more than 100% (from 14,000 to close to 30,000) simply to break even - i.e. no additional revenue available to fund an improved squad.

At the risk of sounding cynical - I think this might explain why a robust business case has not been put forward - simply because there isn't one

As others have said - when SL announced his plan for a new stadium I said I would believe when I was sat (or hopefully stood) in it - I feared then and I still fear now that AV is little more than an elaborate hoax - although I can think of little motivation for it other than to show how easy it is to make football supporters believe what they want to believe perhaps.

[Nogbad the Bad]

It seems to remain the case that we are simply asked to believe (and it seems many do) that the proposed move to Ashton Vale is the only viable option for the future of Bristol City. As far as I can tell no business case has been presented, no options appraisal provided and no funding plan published either to shareholders, supporters or the public in general. Of course SL might argue that until and unless funding is sought from external sources it is entirely his prerogative to keep his plans to himself but to my mind at least such silence cannot be in the best interests of the club and its supporters. If the case for Ashton Vale is as overwhelming as some would have us believe what would be the harm in publishing a brief business case for our information?

In the light (or lack of light) of the wall of silence, history suggests we should remain unconvinced (see recent thread regarding 1982).

I currently have the following material questions:

1. who or what is Vence LLP? - evidently a special purpose company set up by SL & son to own the AV site but what (if anything) is its long-term role? - also if Vence owns the site why have development costs to date been incurred by Bristol City?
   
   
2. why does Vence LLP refer to Ashton Vale as "a new regional stadium" rather than "a new home for Bristol City"? - is this significant or just my paranoia?
   
   
3. how is the development to be funded? - solely as a gift from SL's fortune or (as is far more likely) a mixture of SL capital a debt secured on future non-football revenues (in which case such non-football revenues would be employed to service the debt rather than to support football activities
   
   
4. what, if any, return will SL (or other funders) demand on their "investment"?
   
   
5. why, if St Mary's was constructed for around £30M around 10 years ago, can't one side and one end of Ashton Gate be redeveloped for substantially less than £90M now (construction prices have stagnated since 2008)?
   

Absent any better information, and on the (probably misguided) assumption that the capital cost of the AV project will be funded entirely as a no-strings gift or a new Bristol City rights issue, I have make the following estimates:

1. 100 executive boxes could generate £2M/year in additional revenue (£20K each) if Bristol City can produce a mediocre Premier League team (or say £1M in the Championship / £500K in League 1);
   
   
2. a 200 seat conference centre running at 80% capacity all year round might generate around £1M/year; and
   
   
3. other activities that I haven't thought of - very optimistically perhaps another £2M/year
   

Ignoring the operating costs attached to these additional revenues (and assuming no return for investors) the AV development could therefore contribute an additional £5M/year as a contribution towards operating the Football Club. It should be noted at this point that a 5.5% (£5M/£90M) yield on a property investment is at the high end of what is achievable in the current market which suggests my estimates are very optimistic.

The problem is that the business lost nearly £12M in both of the last two years for which accounts have been published - i.e. even if my estimates are realistic the AV development (absent any substantial increase in attendances) will go less than half way towards meeting the current annual deficit and it will require average attendances to rise by more than 100% (from 14,000 to close to 30,000) simply to break even - i.e. no additional revenue available to fund an improved squad.

At the risk of sounding cynical - I think this might explain why a robust business case has not been put forward - simply because there isn't one

As others have said - when SL announced his plan for a new stadium I said I would believe when I was sat (or hopefully stood) in it - I feared then and I still fear now that AV is little more than an elaborate hoax - although I can think of little motivation for it other than to show how easy it is to make football supporters believe what they want to believe perhaps.

It would be very interesting to see some of the more enthusiastic proponents of AV respond to this post in similar detail.

[chalky]

That's what I thought, I wait with similar interest. I'm certainly not an enthusiastic proponent and don't really want to leave AG so I will standby.

[Manon]

For all the reasons i mentioned in my earlier posts, those are all part and parcel of the matchday, regardless of the standard of football on the park.

Take away that, and you have poor football in a souless concrete excuse of a football stadium.

What you really have is a business centre, with shops and restaurants and a football pitch slapped down in the middle.

Many fans go because of the tradition.

They went with their dads, their grandparents, GF's etc,etc.

It feels like an old comfy pair of slippers.

I'd happily spend all day long in League 1 to keep AG.

When we lose it... and we spend another 100 years treading water, bemoaning our 'Sleeping Giant' tag, and getting no where... then you'll wish we never lost it.

We knock down pretty much everything that is good in this country.

It's a disgrace.

We should hold on to our memories and tradition.

All my mates on the continent think we are nuts for knocking down our old stadiums. And i agree with them.

I used to think like this, but no longer.

I love traditional stadiums, and the iniquity/quirkyness of places like AG, but there comes a time when things have to move forward. Redevelop it, yes - but in effect it'll become a different modern place anyway - a new stadium but just on old ground.

People don't like change. We are creatures of habit. The more we do something or go somewhere, the more we need to do that particular something or go that particular somewhere..(see smoking thread).

I'd be pretty confident that a poll of those who want to stay or want to go coupled with the age of the voter would prove this; the older generations would be more inclined to stay (nostalgia, memory lane, habit), whilst the younger generations would be more inclined to move to pastures new.

I would suggest that AG is actually as much a psychological noose around our neck as it is a scene of happy memories. It has baggage. People only care to remember or associate the good times there. We haven't exactly had a lot of success there, have we, if we're honest. It is the thing which serves as a perpetual reminder of who we are - an underachieving, lower division wannabe. Always believing but never achieving.

It has become a museum piece. The EE is a hundred years old. Much as I love it, we need to keep up with times, financially as well as emotionally.

Imagine waking up one morning and looking in the mirror, instead of seeing an old, grey, wrinkled tired face...you saw a young bright, fit fresh face? Would you be happy? Of course you would. Would you have more confidence going into the day? Definitely. This is the effect a new ground would have for City. Gone would be the cobwebs, the pain, the failures, the inferior complex.

A fresh new start with a fresh attractive image, greater aspirations.

It can only be good for the club.

[The Bard]

Molineux has only been redeveloped because the council compulsary purchased hundreds of terraced homes (also a pub ) around the ground, as Liverpool did for the Kemlyn Road stand.

AG is a very limited site unless the houses on Ashton Road/Raynes Road & the Brabys & Wickes sites were compulsary purchased by the council, we would then have a massive footprint for a new stadium.

But BCC won't go down that route and the cost of a new AG would probably be more than AV.

Conference facilites can bring in a lot of cash these days if promoted properly.

SLs vision is to make us self financing and staying at AG will not enable us to do that unless we cut our wage bill accordingly and that means bringing in poor players.......and we know poor players will not keep you in the championship.

BCAGFC

One of the houses behind the East End is on the market....

[Jordan Tansley]

Envious of our ground? What about are wretched team..... We need revenue from the new ground to progress, why do people not understand this?

How can you go from correctly using 'our' to incorrectly using 'are' for the same meaning within 4 words?

Genuinely confuses me that one.

[chalky]

How can you go from correctly using 'our' to incorrectly using 'are' for the same meaning within 4 words?

Genuinely confuses me that one.

ZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[Timbo7]

Is it time to put a stop to this nonsense?

[BCAGFC]

Is it time to put a stop to this nonsense?

Timbo....you are a NIMBY in every sense of the word, are you related to NickJ & Spudski?.

If you can't back the clubs plans for the future, which most people support & can't see the benefits, then stop trying to devide support.

It really looks like Crispin has recruited you to his little gang of thieves?.

BCAGFC

[bucksred]

When I read comments like this I wonder if some people feel any connection with our Club at all, or simply wish to sit in a big, plastic ground watching anyone as long as it's the PL. It's not a shithole, it's our home. Yes it has some 'outdated' tendancies, but that gives it character. Of the many away grounds I've been too my favourite's are the more traditional grounds such as Molineux and Bramall Lane, hell I'd take Oakwell over the Ricoh every day of the week. Old grounds with character appear to be a dying breed, enjoy them while you still can before every game is held at a Madjeski clone.

I would agree with some of your comments, but not others. Ashton Gate is a tired clapped out old ground now, and it will only get worse. Parking there (and yes I am a travelling supporter) is getting worse and worse and with all this cycle friendly bollocks coming along, will get far worse. IF parking at and nearby the new ground is organized properly, thats one less issue.

Where I do agree with you is on the pubs near the ground bit, as part of the social scene involved on matchdays, its very important tohave said pubs near by (for home and away fans). Most new builds dont think of that, but there again boozers are closing down at a huge rate already...

As to grounds like the Richoh, yesits a shithole, but Swanseas, MK Mongs, and Readings are ok (Parking at Reading & Swansea aint the best through)

We need to relocate, but there needs to be some consultation with fans when moving...

Mind you it wont matter if we get relegated anyways as it will take years to get promoted again...

[Nogbad the Bad]

Timbo....you are a NIMBY in every sense of the word, are you related to NickJ & Spudski?.

If you can't back the clubs plans for the future, which most people support & can't see the benefits, then stop trying to devide support.

It really looks like Crispin has recruited you to his little gang of thieves?.

BCAGFC

Why don't you make the effort to give a detailed answer to Timbo's intelligent and well presented post no. 69 instead of calling him names and goading him?

At the moment it appears you don't have any answers, but as one of the main proponents of the new ground ( on here) surely you must have?

.

[spudski]

Timbo....you are a NIMBY in every sense of the word, are you related to NickJ & Spudski?.

If you can't back the clubs plans for the future, which most people support & can't see the benefits, then stop trying to devide support.

It really looks like Crispin has recruited you to his little gang of thieves?.

BCAGFC

If SL had come up with a plan to redevelop AG and not build a new stadium, would you have gone along with it, or called for him to build a brand new stadium out of town?

There are many supporters of the Club that don't wish a new stadium at AV, just because one man says it's our only way forward.

It's not about creating devide or not supporting the Club.

I for one as a supporter of City feel it would be negative in the long term.

I also don't want to be tarnished as someone who doesn't support the Club, just because i don't go along with one man.

[Frome Valley]

Timbo....you are a NIMBY in every sense of the word, are you related to NickJ & Spudski?.

If you can't back the clubs plans for the future, which most people support & can't see the benefits, then stop trying to devide support.

It really looks like Crispin has recruited you to his little gang of thieves?.

BCAGFC

You can still be a sceptic and support the club.

[Timbo7]

Timbo....you are a NIMBY in every sense of the word, are you related to NickJ & Spudski?.

If you can't back the clubs plans for the future, which most people support & can't see the benefits, then stop trying to devide support.

It really looks like Crispin has recruited you to his little gang of thieves?.

BCAGFC

Really? - aren't you a bit old for name calling?

At the risk of treating your post with respect it may not deserve, may I add the following?

• Ashton Vale is more that six miles from my backyard - does "NIMBY" have another sense?
  
• I cannot support the development unless I am convinced it is the right thing for Bristol City whether it is in my back yard or not
  
• I would welcome answers to all or any of my doubts regarding the business case for the new stadium - whether from Lansdown, the Board or you
  
• If the questions can be answered satisfactorily - it is possible or even likely that I will support the development
  
• My main grievance about all of this is that Lansdown (and the club) has in recent years abandoned any attempt to be open about pretty much anything - this does not bode well for the future
  
• I have previously and without exception acknowledged that increasing revenue potential is an essential part of any realistic plan for a future in the Premier League
  
• I accept my difficulty in believing Bristol City can have a future in the Premier League in the foreseeable future could be called pessimistic or defeatist
  
• my primary (if not only) concern is the long-term sustainability of the club I love - i.e. long after Lansdown has lost interest - if the Ashton Vale project (and its funding plan) is consistent with that then fine
  

I would be most grateful if you could help me understand why your support for Ashton Vale is so strong and unwavering - do you have access to information I have not seen?

In regard to your suggestion that my contributions on this subject are subversive and your request for my silence - If the business case for Ashton Vale is even half as strong as you suggest it would be the easiest thing in the world for someone to outline the case with a few facts and figures and to thereby win me over. Until then, my concern that for all his money Lansdown holds the whole future of the club in his own hands and along with his Board seems to resent detailed questioning on such matters, means that I will continue to do what (if anything) I can to hold individuals to account and/or to register my concerns with others via this forum. Asking for evidence to support an assertion has rarely been considered subversive this side of the Berlin Wall.

Finally - is your own support for the stadium project backed up by anything certain (i.e. source and terms of funding, ownership structure, rights over non-football revenue) or is it simply blind faith? If the latter, I'm sorry to say that you cannot hope to convert me - a Doubting Thomas for life I'm afraid.

Thanks for your support Nogbad, Spudski and Frome Valley - maybe we can hope to be enlightened.

[TRL]

Really? - aren't you a bit old for name calling?

At the risk of treating your post with respect it may not deserve, may I add the following?

• Ashton Vale is more that six miles from my backyard - does "NIMBY" have another sense?
  
• I cannot support the development unless I am convinced it is the right thing for Bristol City whether it is in my back yard or not
  
• I would welcome answers to all or any of my doubts regarding the business case for the new stadium - whether from Lansdown, the Board or you
  
• If the questions can be answered satisfactorily - it is possible or even likely that I will support the development
  
• My main grievance about all of this is that Lansdown (and the club) has in recent years abandoned any attempt to be open about pretty much anything - this does not bode well for the future
  
• I have previously and without exception acknowledged that increasing revenue potential is an essential part of any realistic plan for a future in the Premier League
  
• I accept my difficulty in believing Bristol City can have a future in the Premier League in the foreseeable future could be called pessimistic or defeatist
  
• my primary (if not only) concern is the long-term sustainability of the club I love - i.e. long after Lansdown has lost interest - if the Ashton Vale project (and its funding plan) is consistent with that then fine
  

I would be most grateful if you could help me understand why your support for Ashton Vale is so strong and unwavering - do you have access to information I have not seen?

In regard to your suggestion that my contributions on this subject are subversive and your request for my silence - If the business case for Ashton Vale is even half as strong as you suggest it would be the easiest thing in the world for someone to outline the case with a few facts and figures and to thereby win me over. Until then, my concern that for all his money Lansdown holds the whole future of the club in his own hands and along with his Board seems to resent detailed questioning on such matters, means that I will continue to do what (if anything) I can to hold individuals to account and/or to register my concerns with others via this forum. Asking for evidence to support an assertion has rarely been considered subversive this side of the Berlin Wall.

Finally - is your own support for the stadium project backed up by anything certain (i.e. source and terms of funding, ownership structure, rights over non-football revenue) or is it simply blind faith? If the latter, I'm sorry to say that you cannot hope to convert me - a Doubting Thomas for life I'm afraid.

Thanks for your support Nogbad, Spudski and Frome Valley - maybe we can hope to be enlightened.

Great response. I am firmly with you on this. All we have got from the club is flashy videos, their opinion it is the only way the club will be sustainable, and rhetoric from SL in a call to arms from the fans.

All this on the back of precisely nothing, some meaningless figures from a one sided perspective with no real meat on the bones. SL would seem to promise things to get fans onside to hero worship him, so he can legitimately ride rough shot over the fans and club without anyone ever asking questions. Now he has what he wants, complete control.

I for years have been questioning the way the club has been run. I am glad there are a minority on here that can question what is going on.

You have raised some very very good points, which is easier to respond to by attacking you, rather than giving a relevant argument back from SL's point of view.

Keep questioning, never become a sheep

[KeepUpLino]

Is it time to put a stop to this nonsense?

[CheddarReds]

Then why are so many fans relocated to new stadiums envious of us?

WHAT?!?!?!!

[poland_red]

WHAT?!?!?!!

what don't you understand?

[Nogbad the Bad]

WHAT?!?!?!!

THEN WHY ARE SO MANY FANS RELOCATED TO NEW STADIUMS ENVIOUS OF US?

[chalky]

THEN WHY ARE SO MANY FANS RELOCATED TO NEW STADIUMS ENVIOUS OF US?

Haha!

My mate who is a Swansea fan rates the EE as one of his favourite stands and AG as one of his favourite grounds, he hates their new stadium and misses the vetch like mad. Every time I sees him he says I should do everything I can to stop the new ground going ahead.....

Not saying I agree with him or not but it backs up away fans being envious....

[spudski]

Haha!

My mate who is a Swansea fan rates the EE as one of his favourite stands and AG as one of his favourite grounds, he hates their new stadium and misses the vetch like mad. Every time I sees him he says I should do everything I can to stop the new ground going ahead.....

Not saying I agree with him or not but it backs up away fans being envious....

Ask him whether he would swap prem football for seasons back in the Championship at the old Vetch?

I'd be interested to know... as I would quiet happily settle for that at AG.

I've a few friends who support other clubs at new 'out of town' grounds...and they have all said the same.

They hate their new Stadiums.

[chipdawg]

It would be very interesting to see some of the more enthusiastic proponents of AV respond to this post in similar detail.

With all due respect to the original poster, who obviously has put a lot of time into a very well thought out post, what detail?! It's all, by his own admission, guess work and supposition; there are no facts or 'details' in there. However, I would definitely support his call for a little more transparency in all this from the club. Convince the unbelievers, so to speak. My general retort to the cost of a new stadium vs a redeveloped one is that the current stadium site is worth far more for other uses than the land at Ashton Vale. Therefore a whole new stadium could and will cost significantly more than a couple of new stands, but wouldn't be offset by the sale of the current stadium site

I hadn't been to AG for quite some years until Saturday and while sitting on a wooden seat in the Williams reaffirmed to me that new facilities are required, the walk into the ground definitely made me realise what a shame it'll be to lose the feel of the current ground on a matchday. That said, it also made me realise how difficult it'd be to develop the ground; while there's space behind the Williams, a new stand would be too close to the houses for current planning regs and probably lead to the residents getting rickets from lack of sunlight. It's a shame that Greville Smyth park isn't a former landfill really, plenty of space there...

[spudski]

With all due respect to the original poster, who obviously has put a lot of time into a very well thought out post, what detail?! It's all, by his own admission, guess work and supposition; there are no facts or 'details' in there. However, I would definitely support his call for a little more transparency in all this from the club. Convince the unbelievers, so to speak. My general retort to the cost of a new stadium vs a redeveloped one is that the current stadium site is worth far more for other uses than the land at Ashton Vale. Therefore a whole new stadium could and will cost significantly more than a couple of new stands, but wouldn't be offset by the sale of the current stadium site

I hadn't been to AG for quite some years until Saturday and while sitting on a wooden seat in the Williams reaffirmed to me that new facilities are required, the walk into the ground definitely made me realise what a shame it'll be to lose the feel of the current ground on a matchday. That said, it also made me realise how difficult it'd be to develop the ground; while there's space behind the Williams, a new stand would be too close to the houses for current planning regs and probably lead to the residents getting rickets from lack of sunlight. It's a shame that Greville Smyth park isn't a former landfill really, plenty of space there...

You could make a huge stand on the Williams side without the car park area.

The EE could also be redeveloped.

I've forgotten, but why did we buy up the old DAS building? It's quiet a huge area. A possible new car park?