bigphilgj Posted February 20, 2013 Report Share Posted February 20, 2013 In the q&a with bristol rugby fans tonight steve gorvett said that the seats in the new/redeveloped stadium will be red. They may attempt something with lighting on rugby games and other cosmetic things - but the seats will stay red. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
!james Posted February 20, 2013 Report Share Posted February 20, 2013 Quotes from their CEO tonight: SG: "The seats will remain red. However, we're looking at ways to make the stadium feel as much as a rugby ground as possible on matchdays." SG: "The move to Ashton Gate is logical. We will be partners, we wont just be tenants. Steve Lansdown sees this as a partnership." SG: "The idea of joint ticketing is very clear. There will be a number of synergies between City & Rugby that benefit both sets of fans." SG: "Bristol City FC want to include safe standing and this is an initiative that we are very keen to support." SG: "The new DESSO pitch will be four times as strong as an average playing surface. Ashton Gate will support both sports with no issues." SG: "Ashton Gate will become a rugby stadium on rugby matchdays. This is a significant step for us at a Club." SG: "It's Bristol City's stadium and we respect them and their fan's views. This is a joint effort between both Clubs." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS15_RED Posted February 20, 2013 Report Share Posted February 20, 2013 All sounds good thus far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tall King Blox Posted February 20, 2013 Report Share Posted February 20, 2013 Great colour IMO, all we need now is arses to fill them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Till I'm Dead Posted February 20, 2013 Report Share Posted February 20, 2013 Great colour IMO, all we need now is arses to fill them We got plenty of those, just need people to make a effort and turn up! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tall King Blox Posted February 20, 2013 Report Share Posted February 20, 2013 Point taken, was that a bitch, ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scrumpy_247 Posted February 20, 2013 Report Share Posted February 20, 2013 I just can't show positivity towards Bristol Rugby moving in with us, the rugby will ruin the pitch, I feel they should move to the Gas' new stadium with them lot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keepers Ball Posted February 20, 2013 Report Share Posted February 20, 2013 No Rugby at The Gate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephen Lewis Posted February 21, 2013 Report Share Posted February 21, 2013 To go with the no football ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fiale Posted February 21, 2013 Report Share Posted February 21, 2013 I hate the lines that always show - remember when there were some American football matches at AG in the past and the line marking were visible for a couple of months after, looked horrible (though having the yardage marked out, did show how few refs know their distances for set pieces). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS34Red Posted February 21, 2013 Report Share Posted February 21, 2013 Surprised no one has really picked up on what their ceo said tonight considering there was a huge debate on it a few weeks back. He has said they will be partners not just tenants. As i said at the time considering Lansdown owns both clubs and the stadium I really do hope we gain financially from this. However I just can't see how we will. I suspect the rugby lot will earn more out of this partnership than we will sadly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admin phantom Posted February 21, 2013 Admin Report Share Posted February 21, 2013 Surprised no one has really picked up on what their ceo said tonight considering there was a huge debate on it a few weeks back. He has said they will be partners not just tenants. As i said at the time considering Lansdown owns both clubs and the stadium I really do hope we gain financially from this. However I just can't see how we will. I suspect the rugby lot will earn more out of this partnership than we will sadly.Which is what I said a few weeks back, Bristol Sport (Ashton Gate Ltd)own Ashton Gate NOT Bristol City.Money will not come to the football that is made at the rugby gamesOne thing I thought was interesting last night was how everyone was talking about playing at Ashton Gate in the future, at no point was there any mention of Ashton Vale?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
semblar Posted February 21, 2013 Report Share Posted February 21, 2013 Surprised no one has really picked up on what their ceo said tonight considering there was a huge debate on it a few weeks back. He has said they will be partners not just tenants. As i said at the time considering Lansdown owns both clubs and the stadium I really do hope we gain financially from this. However I just can't see how we will. I suspect the rugby lot will earn more out of this partnership than we will sadly. I think there is a difference between the legal arrangement - where they WILL be tenants and playing rent - and the working arrangements where they will have a say in things, like for example how to make whichever stadium it is look and feel more like a rugby stadium when they are playing. This is nothing we should be worried about in my opinion. On the financial side of things, at the very least we will have far less need to have BCFC effectively make up any shortfall in non-matchday revenue to keep the ground maintained because income from the rugby side of things will also be contributing. While no cash might change hands, there would have to be a nominal charge shown in the group accounting processes to allow the stadium company to remain viable on paper. There will also be some synergies such as joint admin costs (one ticket office, one shop, etc.) which will mean that the club has lower outgoings. It is also possible that we will gain some new fans if (for example) joint season tickets are introduced - while most of the traffic will likely be adding rugby to a footbal ST (because of the relative pricing of the two) I doubt that it will be 100% one-way Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
054123 Posted February 21, 2013 Report Share Posted February 21, 2013 I don't mind blue seats. In fact if means premiership football, we could change our strip to blue as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBW Posted February 21, 2013 Report Share Posted February 21, 2013 Only bit I don't feel positive about is that every time he refers to the build he says Ashton Gate and never Vale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glynriley Posted February 21, 2013 Report Share Posted February 21, 2013 http://www.bristolrugby.co.uk/news/8571/stadium-groundshare-fan-s-q-a-review/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted February 21, 2013 Report Share Posted February 21, 2013 Surprised no one has really picked up on what their ceo said tonight considering there was a huge debate on it a few weeks back. He has said they will be partners not just tenants. As i said at the time considering Lansdown owns both clubs and the stadium I really do hope we gain financially from this. However I just can't see how we will. I suspect the rugby lot will earn more out of this partnership than we will sadly."SL sees this as a partnership" is exactly the sort of thing that would be said when on paper, it isn't.Any re-developed Ashton Gate will have unchanged ownership - JL said that publicly.It's unclear what would happen to ownership if the Vale goes ahead and we must get clarity on that, indeed, but since there's no financial benefit in moving the ownership to the rugby club and we already have a ground we ought to expect and demand the stadium's ownership remains tied to the football club wholly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS3 GAS Posted February 21, 2013 Report Share Posted February 21, 2013 Surely the ownership is not an issue fro BCFC or Bristol RC as the ground is owned by lansdown as are both clubs therefore making it irrelevent unless SL wants to sell the ground and or 1 or both the sports clubs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calculus Posted February 21, 2013 Report Share Posted February 21, 2013 Which is what I said a few weeks back, Bristol Sport (Ashton Gate Ltd)own Ashton Gate NOT Bristol City. Money will not come to the football that is made at the rugby games One thing I thought was interesting last night was how everyone was talking about playing at Ashton Gate in the future, at no point was there any mention of Ashton Vale?? ... and I assume that money made from concerts, conferences and the like will also not go to the football club... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted February 21, 2013 Report Share Posted February 21, 2013 Surely the ownership is not an issue fro BCFC or Bristol RC as the ground is owned by lansdown as are both clubs therefore making it irrelevent unless SL wants to sell the ground and or 1 or both the sports clubs.Of course it's an issue, we don't want to end up being a bunch of ground stealing gypsies.Ashton Gate is currently owned by the group company for the football club, there is no ownership tie to the rugby at all and that should not change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admin phantom Posted February 21, 2013 Admin Report Share Posted February 21, 2013 ... and I assume that money made from concerts, conferences and the like will also not go to the football club...Would assume it goes to the stadium owners, who are not Bristol City FC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
herman Posted February 21, 2013 Report Share Posted February 21, 2013 I just can't show positivity towards Bristol Rugby moving in with us, the rugby will ruin the pitch, I feel they should move to the Gas' new stadium with them lot maybe they want to stay in bristol, and moving out with the bumrock pirates isnt an option? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS34Red Posted February 21, 2013 Report Share Posted February 21, 2013 I think there is a difference between the legal arrangement - where they WILL be tenants and playing rent - and the working arrangements where they will have a say in things, like for example how to make whichever stadium it is look and feel more like a rugby stadium when they are playing. This is nothing we should be worried about in my opinion. On the financial side of things, at the very least we will have far less need to have BCFC effectively make up any shortfall in non-matchday revenue to keep the ground maintained because income from the rugby side of things will also be contributing. While no cash might change hands, there would have to be a nominal charge shown in the group accounting processes to allow the stadium company to remain viable on paper. There will also be some synergies such as joint admin costs (one ticket office, one shop, etc.) which will mean that the club has lower outgoings. It is also possible that we will gain some new fans if (for example) joint season tickets are introduced - while most of the traffic will likely be adding rugby to a footbal ST (because of the relative pricing of the two) I doubt that it will be 100% one-wayit begs the question as to what does Bristol City Fc actually gain out of this arrangement? From all i've seen I can only see positives for the rugby club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted February 21, 2013 Report Share Posted February 21, 2013 it begs the question as to what does Bristol City Fc actually gain out of this arrangement? From all i've seen I can only see positives for the rugby club.The answer is, not very much - whatever operational costs are shared basically which would be the rent charged to the rugby club.To be honest as long as we don't lose out by it I don't mind, it'll be nice to have Bristol's top two teams in one place and in some small way to right the wrongs of how the blue few stole the rugby club's home. Moral superiority and all that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaltfordRed Posted February 21, 2013 Report Share Posted February 21, 2013 Good news about the red seats. Any ideas when we'll be able to see images of what a redeveloped AG would look like from the inside? (Stands etc) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan Tansley Posted February 21, 2013 Report Share Posted February 21, 2013 it begs the question as to what does Bristol City Fc actually gain out of this arrangement? From all i've seen I can only see positives for the rugby club. I would guess that merging of many of the two clubs staff into one would make it much cheaper for SL and therefore more money available for both clubs on the pitch. It would also imagine that with our accounts we will be able to move a few things about to help with FFP, but that's a wild assumption on my part. I'm sure Lansdown gains from this and that can't be a bad thing as he owns the club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Jon Posted February 21, 2013 Report Share Posted February 21, 2013 Dident like how it said out side would have a nertural feel think that should be red to Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steviestevieneville Posted February 21, 2013 Report Share Posted February 21, 2013 SG: "It's Bristol City's stadium and we respect them and their fan's views. This is a joint effort between both Clubs." It's there in a nutshell. It's our ground, always has been always will be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
havanatopia Posted February 22, 2013 Report Share Posted February 22, 2013 "SL sees this as a partnership" is exactly the sort of thing that would be said when on paper, it isn't. Any re-developed Ashton Gate will have unchanged ownership - JL said that publicly. It's unclear what would happen to ownership if the Vale goes ahead and we must get clarity on that, indeed, but since there's no financial benefit in moving the ownership to the rugby club and we already have a ground we ought to expect and demand the stadium's ownership remains tied to the football club wholly. As far as I understand it the stadium has already been 'de-coupled'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.