Really Starting To Get P1Ssed Off

[Nibor]

Most unlikely for a number of reasons.

1) The project cost (including nominal land values etc) is £40m but the construction cost will be much less. E.g. Brighton's new ground has a project cost of £93m but cost £66m to build.

2) Because of its catchment area and the lack of alternative sites, the site is worth more to Sainsbury's than Ashton Gate - around £28m. (Last years shareholders report for Sainsbury's apparently shows a provision for £31m for stores in Bristol)

3) If the ratio of construction to project cost is similar to Brighton's then there isn't a funding gap.

4) Construction is what Nick Higgs knows about and UWE aren't going to get involved in something that won't work.

You're a lot more optimistic than I would be based on information given to you by a board with a track record of lying and incompetence.

It simply doesn't stack up that the sale of the ground (for a value which isn't public) will cover building a new one. Not even close.

Ask more difficult questions and you will find that if there is a magical debt free fairyland, it is one in which you have sold decades of future revenue in terms of leases up front for much lower value than they would bring otherwise, and UWEs end is covered by having a large chunk of that.

What that means is that if the project can be delivered, there will be little positive impact on your club's annual earnings. And if it goes over budget, and big construction jobs always do, you will be carrying debt as well.

[Nibor]

"UWE will own all the non match day revenue"

complete BS mate.... Rovers will own the stadium and all that goes on within it includeing non matchday revenues, they woill LEASE THE LAND on a peppercorn rent , not the stadium parts of the stadium and its facilites will be used by the UWE ex gratia yes but all monies taken from confrencing, concerts, weddings ect ect will go to Rovers

Your very quick to tell people to get there facts and figures right and accuse people of making stuff up yet do exactly the same thing yourself.

Use common sense - UWE are really giving away prime land to get use of some sporting facilities? :laugh:. I guess we'll see what your books look like after it's done.

As for AG or AV and the rugby club sharing /Part owning it.... its the best deal for Lansdown thats all that matters to him as he owns both so putting both in 1 place will save HIM money the relevance of who owns the stadium is kind of irrelevent ... City or Rugby Club matters not as the ground is owned by Lansdown in the same way UWE and most other Stadiums are owned by the club owners , fact is SL bankrolls yourselves and Bristol RC and covers the losses so its him who will make the money from the ground and will dish the money out to who he wants to... my worry if i was a red would be if Bristol RC become succesful in the Premiership and City flounder for a while, then the money making arm of Bristol Sports LTd will become the rugby club not BCFC and the worry would be that in thoses circumstances he could favour the Rugby Club... all ifs and buts and FWIW i cant see therugby club troubling the Rugby big league for a while and you lot now have a much better chance of staying up.

Of course we're in Lansdown's hands but he's involved because he's a Bristol City fan. He isn't a Bristol Rugby fan, he's helping out there. The ownership does matter, and I'm confident it will be tied to the football club because there's no reason for it not to be - and plenty of reasons not to change it.

[weeble]

For a conventionally constructed ground I would agree with you. Swansea's Liberty stadium, which is a similar size, cost £30m a few years ago. The bowl construction technique (AV is also using it, if/when it gets built) reduces construction costs by nearly half, as there is no expensive steelwork required to prop up the stands.

Construction costs can rise (as NH will know very well) so maybe the Buckingham Group, who invented this technique, have agreed a fixed price contract?

UWE could in effect exchange naming rights for the 125 year lease. I would be quite happy with that as it tells you where the ground is, rather than changing its name every 5 years to a different credit card company.

[BS3 GAS]

Use common sense - UWE are really giving away prime land to get use of some sporting facilities? :laugh:. I guess we'll see what your books look like after it's done.

Of course we're in Lansdown's hands but he's involved because he's a Bristol City fan. He isn't a Bristol Rugby fan, he's helping out there. The ownership does matter, and I'm confident it will be tied to the football club because there's no reason for it not to be - and plenty of reasons not to change it.

they are giving away land to have a prime sporting venue which they can use and have a major selling factor for other investors and pulling in students it also provides them with vital car parking space that they needed as they are building on there main car park , if you read the stuff about it from UWE instaed of just trying to find problems with the sceme with stuff you just make up you would know about the deal and who owns what and whats in it for UWE go read it and then if you find your facts thenquote me where im wrong...

[Kid in the Riot]

they are giving away land to have a prime sporting venue which they can use and have a major selling factor for other investors and pulling in students it also provides them with vital car parking space that they needed as they are building on there main car park , if you read the stuff about it from UWE instaed of just trying to find problems with the sceme with stuff you just make up you would know about the deal and who owns what and whats in it for UWE go read it and then if you find your facts thenquote me where im wrong...

You are correct to say that off field revenue made by the stadium will go to the football club. I think that was quite clever from Higgs.

Then and again if you think flogging pints to students at £1.50 is going to bring in a significant revenue stream...

And friendlygas will you SHUT UP, never read so much made up b0ll0x in all my life. Seriously, go away you're a complete wind-up merchant

[BS3 GAS]

You are correct to say that off field revenue made by the stadium will go to the football club. I think that was quite clever from Higgs.

Then and again if you think flogging pints to students at £1.50 is going to bring in a significant revenue stream...

And friendlygas will you SHUT UP, never read so much made up b0ll0x in all my life. Seriously, go away you're a complete wind-up merchant

Those that read my posts on here will know i like the banter but im no WUM,

Back to the stadium stuff it will be a lot more than student pints making money at UWE , bars will help but conferencing and hospitality is where the money is made then theres the provision for gigs ect , the students in the bars is a bonus that hardly any football clubs will have , ive been to the mem bars when open on non matchdays and the bars at the gate on non match days rarely more than a handfull in there , whereas students will lash it up all day everyday bless the tax dodging little buggers!!

[Kid in the Riot]

Those that read my posts on here will know i like the banter but im no WUM,

Back to the stadium stuff it will be a lot more than student pints making money at UWE , bars will help but conferencing and hospitality is where the money is made then theres the provision for gigs ect , the students in the bars is a bonus that hardly any football clubs will have , ive been to the mem bars when open on non matchdays and the bars at the gate on non match days rarely more than a handfull in there , whereas students will lash it up all day everyday bless the tax dodging little buggers!!

Gigs - you can only do 3 a year at UWE stadium due to a planning condition and from experience we have here at AG with them I can tell you that they are not very profitable - even ones that sell out. If/when the Arena is built that will take some of the business away from the stadiums. Also will the redeveloped Glos CC have provision for concerts as I know Taunton do?

Bars/conferencing/hospitality will all be available at AG/AV as well, and on a similar scale I believe (ie conferencing for up to 900 people) to UWE. The proposed 'super pub' at AG would I'm sure aim to keep busy 7 days a week.

Is the club and existing bars at UWE closing down? If not, you'll be in competition with them.

Also hearing a lot about how UWE is in the epicenter of transport links. Good I agree...but then AG/AV will be all of 2 miles from the city centre?? That's also pretty good...and with a fast rail link from Phead and BTM to open up...

[Geoff65]

I like how sports fans (me included) are/have been reciting spin from their club's men in charge to make arguments for and against various aspects of the new grounds.

It would appear that SL has decided to not go ahead with AV and is now publicising a different route to take the club. The mechanisms are in place, new survey from the supporters club about to be released which will no doubt show that the majority will go along with the latest spin from the management.

I took a very keen interest in the AV project, tesco/sainsburys fiascos and have decided that my one voice will be drowned out by the current populist spin induced view that will be close enough to what the owner of this club wants to happen.

My concerns are; AV was projected increased attendances but no actual evidence has ever been produced to show how this is achieved without success on the pitch. How can a smaller plot at AG will produce a huge revenue increase nearly equivalent to the one at AV.

Revenue forecasts at AV, AG and UWE have and will never be revealed, until they are released how anyone can be convinced by the spin from their respective management baffles me, as people are a damn site cleverer in their personal life than when it comes to regurgitating the hopes and aspirations of their teams management.

My voice I referred to earlier is one of financial transparency, to allow fans a real look at what the assumptions are. It seems quite ludicrous that we need Environment Reports, Ecology reports, Construction plans, travel assessments etc... but when it comes to money and funding then it's all shrouded in secrecy.

[DancinDannyD]

It's Hear Hear

If you want AG/AV to be exclusive to BCFC then be prepared to pay for it................

The bill that SL has picked up is between £75 - £127Million depending on AG or AV.

If Bristol RFC pay - say - £500K** per annum in rent then that would be the equivalent of 50 quid extra on your season ticket

Happy with that are you ?

** Wasps pay £650K pa to play at wycombe, Saracens £489K at Watford. so 500K seems about right,

£500k! Well I understand Bristol Rugby pay about £100k pa for rent at the Mem. And yet City fans and rugby fans accuse Rovers of ripping them off, that seems a VERY favourable deal to me.

So where exactly is this 'benefit' to Bristol Rugby of playing at AG or AV? I think someone has their sums woefully wrong!

[DancinDannyD]

Your 5000 will look brilliant in that new stadium

This argument always make me laugh. Rovers crowds will FALL in the UWE according to City fans (we got 8,500 last time out at a delapidated old rugby ground with piss-poor facilities), yet you need 30,000 expandable to 40,000 at AV as your crowds will (obviously) soar from the current 13,000 or so with the 'new stadium' effect.

Keep kidding yourselves that we'll get 5,000 in the UWE and that you'd get 30,000 sell-outs each week at the Vale, it provides quality entertainment on an otherwise sh*tty day at work!

[DancinDannyD]

All this rubbish about them lot. And they are tenants. Them lot are us lot. They are owned by the same bloke. He will want lower upkeep of both clubs. It will be 50/50. Neither paying rent. Both taking 100% from gate receipts. There is no good reason for SL to take from one and give to another when he owns both.

Link, haven't got one. Just makes financial sense for SL and his clubs. There is no them and us, that is purely in city and bristol fans eyes.

Neither paying rent, so who pays for the upkeep and running of the stadium then? If it's the Holding Company then they will need an income otherwise they'll run at a loss - so that suggests to me that all ancilliary revenues from AV or AG will go to the Stadium company and NOT City or the Rugby club. So that denegrates the financial benefit to either sporting club - I think you got it one that that it makes financial sense though for SL!

[bakes]

nobody is interested in basement rovers, what on earth have they got to shout about?, lets talk about our real rivals and the game saturday, can't wait for this one, i am sure they are not looking forward to playing us, will be a great atmosphere, sell out away following!

Looking forward to a great day out

you reds

[glynriley]

This argument always make me laugh. Rovers crowds will FALL in the UWE according to City fans (we got 8,500 last time out at a delapidated old rugby ground with piss-poor facilities), yet you need 30,000 expandable to 40,000 at AV as your crowds will (obviously) soar from the current 13,000 or so with the 'new stadium' effect.

Keep kidding yourselves that we'll get 5,000 in the UWE and that you'd get 30,000 sell-outs each week at the Vale, it provides quality entertainment on an otherwise sh*tty day at work!

Probably due to it being being a Friday night and the Quid-a-kid offers. It was about 3K above your normal average for the season wasn't it ?

[Garland-sweden]

Really Get Starting P1Ssed Off the winter here in Sweden. The snow came in nov, and its still snowing, puh. Not the subject, but Im so tired off it. Anyway COYR!!!

[DancinDannyD]

Probably due to it being being a Friday night and the Quid-a-kid offers. It was about 3K above your normal average for the season wasn't it ?

Yes, in a season where we've not been out of the bottom 6 all season playing the most DIRE football I can recall seeing in many many years under McGhee (average 5,873).

However, since John Ward came in and actually played people in their natural positions and actually has a clue what he's doing, the average gate has been 7,315 - not bad for a team 92nd in the entire Football League when he took over, and until Friday week ago were still in the relegation zone.

So there's no way we'd get 5,000 at the UWE. Any slight inkling of a semi-decent team and we'd be getting 5 figure crowds in a new ground for sure. We won't fill it straight away and nobody is kidding themselves that we will (unlike some Reds ) but a good season in L2 or L1 in a modern stadium with decent, comfortable facilities rather than a crumbling, delapidated old rugby ground with shockingly bad facilities and we'd be over 10k easily.

edit: and I'd also expect a lot more scope for quid a kid type offers and family deals (similiar to Bradford) given the opportunities that the UWE will provide if that was indeed the driver for the increased attendance v Barnet

[weeble]

I like how sports fans (me included) are/have been reciting spin from their club's men in charge to make arguments for and against various aspects of the new grounds.

It would appear that SL has decided to not go ahead with AV and is now publicising a different route to take the club. The mechanisms are in place, new survey from the supporters club about to be released which will no doubt show that the majority will go along with the latest spin from the management.

I took a very keen interest in the AV project, tesco/sainsburys fiascos and have decided that my one voice will be drowned out by the current populist spin induced view that will be close enough to what the owner of this club wants to happen.

My concerns are; AV was projected increased attendances but no actual evidence has ever been produced to show how this is achieved without success on the pitch. How can a smaller plot at AG will produce a huge revenue increase nearly equivalent to the one at AV.

Revenue forecasts at AV, AG and UWE have and will never be revealed, until they are released how anyone can be convinced by the spin from their respective management baffles me, as people are a damn site cleverer in their personal life than when it comes to regurgitating the hopes and aspirations of their teams management.

My voice I referred to earlier is one of financial transparency, to allow fans a real look at what the assumptions are. It seems quite ludicrous that we need Environment Reports, Ecology reports, Construction plans, travel assessments etc... but when it comes to money and funding then it's all shrouded in secrecy.

A very fair point. However the planning authorities have no legal requirement to make sure an application is financially viable, only that it meets the appropriate planning tests. It is left to some of the fans (on both sides of the city) to wonder how/if the numbers stack up and who ends up owning what.

[glynriley]

Yes, in a season where we've not been out of the bottom 6 all season playing the most DIRE football I can recall seeing in many many years under McGhee (average 5,873).

However, since John Ward came in and actually played people in their natural positions and actually has a clue what he's doing, the average gate has been 7,315 - not bad for a team 92nd in the entire Football League when he took over, and until Friday week ago were still in the relegation zone.

So there's no way we'd get 5,000 at the UWE. Any slight inkling of a semi-decent team and we'd be getting 5 figure crowds in a new ground for sure. We won't fill it straight away and nobody is kidding themselves that we will (unlike some Reds ) but a good season in L2 or L1 in a modern stadium with decent, comfortable facilities rather than a crumbling, delapidated old rugby ground with shockingly bad facilities and we'd be over 10k easily.

edit: and I'd also expect a lot more scope for quid a kid type offers and family deals (similiar to Bradford) given the opportunities that the UWE will provide if that was indeed the driver for the increased attendance v Barnet

I've got no doubt your crowds will increase , if and when , the new stadium opens. However , after the initial curiosity factor has worn off , you will be back to getting crowds of between 5K - 8K , which could possibly rise to 10K to 12K if you were to get in the Championship.

Look at the history of your attendances , even when you were at Eastville , they were pretty woeful. I know you were exiled in Bath for a few years but your average attendance hasn't topped 10K since the mid '70s and hasn't gone above 15K since the late '50s.

FWIW , I don't think we need anything like a 30K stadium and a newly developed Ashton Gate at 26K would do me fine.

[weeble]

I've got no doubt your crowds will increase , if and when , the new stadium opens. However , after the initial curiosity factor has worn off , you will be back to getting crowds of between 5K - 8K , which could possibly rise to 10K to 12K if you were to get in the Championship.

Look at the history of your attendances , even when you were at Eastville , they were pretty woeful. I know you were exiled in Bath for a few years but your average attendance hasn't topped 10K since the mid '70s and hasn't gone above 15K since the late '50s.

FWIW , I don't think we need anything like a 30K stadium and a newly developed Ashton Gate at 26K would do me fine.

It's difficult to compare crowds over time. In its final years Eastville was an absolute dump, making the Mem look quite good. We haven't had a ground that could actually hold 12,000 since the seventies.

It's all about potential. For the first time in arguably our entire history, we will have a modern ground of comparable standard in size (potentially at least) and facilities to yours and we will own it.

That, despite Lansdown's money, makes the playing field a lot flatter. If our side of the city seems remarkably excited then please forgive us. This is uncharted territory for both teams.

[Kid in the Riot]

Yes, in a season where we've not been out of the bottom 6 all season playing the most DIRE football I can recall seeing in many many years under McGhee (average 5,873).

However, since John Ward came in and actually played people in their natural positions and actually has a clue what he's doing, the average gate has been 7,315 - not bad for a team 92nd in the entire Football League when he took over, and until Friday week ago were still in the relegation zone.

So there's no way we'd get 5,000 at the UWE. Any slight inkling of a semi-decent team and we'd be getting 5 figure crowds in a new ground for sure. We won't fill it straight away and nobody is kidding themselves that we will (unlike some Reds ) but a good season in L2 or L1 in a modern stadium with decent, comfortable facilities rather than a crumbling, delapidated old rugby ground with shockingly bad facilities and we'd be over 10k easily.

edit: and I'd also expect a lot more scope for quid a kid type offers and family deals (similiar to Bradford) given the opportunities that the UWE will provide if that was indeed the driver for the increased attendance v Barnet

Look at you wetting yourself over a potential crowd of 10k!!

[glynriley]

It's difficult to compare crowds over time. In its final years Eastville was an absolute dump, making the Mem look quite good. We haven't had a ground that could actually hold 12,000 since the seventies.

It's all about potential. For the first time in arguably our entire history, we will have a modern ground of comparable standard in size (potentially at least) and facilities to yours and we will own it.

That, despite Lansdown's money, makes the playing field a lot flatter. If our side of the city seems remarkably excited then please forgive us. This is uncharted territory for both teams.

Is that right ? I thought the crowd for the FA cup game in '83 was more than that. Wasn't the largest crowd at Eastville over 38K , surely the South Stand fire wouldn't have had that much affect on the capacity. Anyway , I might be wrong , it has been known

I don't blame you all for getting excited but it must be tempered with a bit of realism.

[DancinDannyD]

Look at you wetting yourself over a potential crowd of 10k!!

No, not wetting myself. Just correcting some ignorant views from City fans that we'd get 5,000 in the UWE whilst you'd sell-out AV

In your position, i.e. in the Championship, I'm confident that we'd at least match your crowds (or be very damn near them) in a modern all-seated ground on a par with yours rather than a crumbling, delapidated, tired old stadium with poor facilities (e.g. have you seen the loos at the Mem? shocking!).

For years you've had the better ground (even AG in it's current state is far, far better than the final years at Eastville, Twerton & the Mem) so of course given the choice the casual fan or newbie to the area would go to the Gate.

At the UWE, if we can get promoted to L1 in a season or two (big ask, but achievable) and assuming you go down this year and don't bounce back immediately (sadly SOD is trying his best to prevent relegation this year ) then if we open up the UWE in the same division as you (L1) I'm pretty confident there wouldn't be that much difference between our gates.

[weeble]

Is that right ? I thought the crowd for the FA cup game in '83 was more than that. Wasn't the largest crowd at Eastville over 38K , surely the South Stand fire wouldn't have had that much affect on the capacity. Anyway , I might be wrong , it has been known

I don't blame you all for getting excited but it must be tempered with a bit of realism.

It was the Safety at Sports Grounds Act 1975 that made the big difference. I remember being a very squashed kid in a crowd of over 33,000 in the league cup quarter finals against Stoke in 1971. The theoretical capacity was 39,000 - I'm amazed there weren't more accidents before the new regulations came in.

[glynriley]

It was the Safety at Sports Grounds Act 1975 that made the big difference. I remember being a very squashed kid in a crowd of over 33,000 in the league cup quarter finals against Stoke in 1971. The theoretical capacity was 39,000 - I'm amazed there weren't more accidents before the new regulations came in.

That sums up perfectly why most City fans don't think you will be getting the fantastic crowds some of you believe you will.

A crowd of over 33K in a season where your average was just over 11K. You've always had potential for bigger crowds , as proven in cup games and Wembley appearances , but when push comes to shove , most gasheads don't turn up on a regular basis.

[chalky]

No, not wetting myself. Just correcting some ignorant views from City fans that we'd get 5,000 in the UWE whilst you'd sell-out AV

In your position, i.e. in the Championship, I'm confident that we'd at least match your crowds (or be very damn near them) in a modern all-seated ground on a par with yours rather than a crumbling, delapidated, tired old stadium with poor facilities (e.g. have you seen the loos at the Mem? shocking!).

For years you've had the better ground (even AG in it's current state is far, far better than the final years at Eastville, Twerton & the Mem) so of course given the choice the casual fan or newbie to the area would go to the Gate.

At the UWE, if we can get promoted to L1 in a season or two (big ask, but achievable) and assuming you go down this year and don't bounce back immediately (sadly SOD is trying his best to prevent relegation this year ) then if we open up the UWE in the same division as you (L1) I'm pretty confident there wouldn't be that much difference between our gates.

A gashead said this to me in work the other day - Seemed to think the difference in attendances was largely due to the neutral opting to watch Div 2 football rather than Div 4. Sounds plausible but when you think for a moment it is actually a laughable argument! You just have to compare the amount of Season ticket holders between the 2 club as STH's cannot be classed as neutral. When I said we had over 10k STH's his reponse was "oh really?" - blew his argument out of the water.

[old parkender]

I'm puzzled by the sainsburys/rovers secrecy pact, why? When sainsburys agreed to buy Ashton gate a fee was publicised, lansdown explained he was funding the rest of the project, job done, why won't rovers reveal how much the mem was sold for, why won't they reveal how the build is going to be funded? What's the big secret, after years of being mislead I believe gas fans should have the right to know every detail to be sure they arnt being led up the swannee again. Remember like city most of rovers debt is owed to the owner so when they say debt free that just means "I'm getting my money back"

On a side note a poster mentioned sainsburys provision of 31 million for new stores in Bristol, does that include the 20 million for Ashton gate?

[BS3 GAS]

I'm puzzled by the sainsburys/rovers secrecy pact, why? When sainsburys agreed to buy Ashton gate a fee was publicised, lansdown explained he was funding the rest of the project, job done, why won't rovers reveal how much the mem was sold for, why won't they reveal how the build is going to be funded? What's the big secret, after years of being mislead I believe gas fans should have the right to know every detail to be sure they arnt being led up the swannee again. Remember like city most of rovers debt is owed to the owner so when they say debt free that just means "I'm getting my money back"

On a side note a poster mentioned sainsburys provision of 31 million for new stores in Bristol, does that include the 20 million for Ashton gate?

possibly not... now that it seems unlikely AV will happen, Sainsburys will not be built at Ashton Gate, (

[weeble]

I'm puzzled by the sainsburys/rovers secrecy pact, why? When sainsburys agreed to buy Ashton gate a fee was publicised, lansdown explained he was funding the rest of the project, job done, why won't rovers reveal how much the mem was sold for, why won't they reveal how the build is going to be funded? What's the big secret, after years of being mislead I believe gas fans should have the right to know every detail to be sure they arnt being led up the swannee again. Remember like city most of rovers debt is owed to the owner so when they say debt free that just means "I'm getting my money back"

On a side note a poster mentioned sainsburys provision of 31 million for new stores in Bristol, does that include the 20 million for Ashton gate?

I'm puzzled by the sainsburys/rovers secrecy pact, why? When sainsburys agreed to buy Ashton gate a fee was publicised, lansdown explained he was funding the rest of the project, job done, why won't rovers reveal how much the mem was sold for, why won't they reveal how the build is going to be funded? What's the big secret, after years of being mislead I believe gas fans should have the right to know every detail to be sure they arnt being led up the swannee again. Remember like city most of rovers debt is owed to the owner so when they say debt free that just means "I'm getting my money back"

On a side note a poster mentioned sainsburys provision of 31 million for new stores in Bristol, does that include the 20 million for Ashton gate?

Presumably as Tesco's had already agreed a deal then pulled out, the going rate was no secret. Sainsbury's can avoid letting their commercial rivals know how much they were willing to pay untill it turns up in their or Rovers' public accounts.

They have already said how it it will be funded. Mostly the money from Sainsbury's, a grant from the Football Trust and the club. I assume the latter will be via the leases for the teaching space and the convenience store at the new stadium.

[weeble]

That sums up perfectly why most City fans don't think you will be getting the fantastic crowds some of you believe you will.

A crowd of over 33K in a season where your average was just over 11K. You've always had potential for bigger crowds , as proven in cup games and Wembley appearances , but when push comes to shove , most gasheads don't turn up on a regular basis.

That applies to all clubs, City included. Success on the pitch is the ultimate driver. We won't find out the answer until both clubs have had new/refurbished stadia for a few years, are in the same division and doing roughly equally well.

Even then Rovers fans will point to the ten lost years in Bath, during which a certain Mr S. Lansdown decided he'd rather take the shorter trip to Ashton Gate.

[glynriley]

That applies to all clubs, City included. Success on the pitch is the ultimate driver. We won't find out the answer until both clubs have had new/refurbished stadia for a few years, are in the same division and doing roughly equally well.

Even then Rovers fans will point to the ten lost years in Bath, during which a certain Mr S. Lansdown decided he'd rather take the shorter trip to Ashton Gate.

Possibly , but when you were in the 2nd tier at Eastville in the 70s , your crowds were still around the 8K mark. As you say , we'll have to wait and see.

[BS34Red]

No, not wetting myself. Just correcting some ignorant views from City fans that we'd get 5,000 in the UWE whilst you'd sell-out AV

In your position, i.e. in the Championship, I'm confident that we'd at least match your crowds (or be very damn near them) in a modern all-seated ground on a par with yours rather than a crumbling, delapidated, tired old stadium with poor facilities (e.g. have you seen the loos at the Mem? shocking!).

For years you've had the better ground (even AG in it's current state is far, far better than the final years at Eastville, Twerton & the Mem) so of course given the choice the casual fan or newbie to the area would go to the Gate.

At the UWE, if we can get promoted to L1 in a season or two (big ask, but achievable) and assuming you go down this year and don't bounce back immediately (sadly SOD is trying his best to prevent relegation this year ) then if we open up the UWE in the same division as you (L1) I'm pretty confident there wouldn't be that much difference between our gates.

Please show a little respect for the memorial ground of Bristol. Thank you very much.