The Prawn Sandwich Stand

[tin]

Before people start questioning why I haven't raised this on the other main EE thread, it's because I've got some major concerns that I believe deserve there own thread to be debated on.

As a season ticket holder in the Atyeo stand, I feel that it was constructed very poorly with minimal effort put into research, especially when it come to the acoustics. Yet as of next year we're going to have a 5,300 stand that dwarfs the Dolman.

That suggests to me the following things:

1) It's going to be a very steep stand if it dwarfs the Dolman which will most likely be to the detriment of the atmosphere.

2) Does it mean construction commencing in a year's time means it'll be ready for the 08/09 season, if so, that stinks of a botch job to me...

3) It's design is purely based around corporate hospitality because 5,300 isn't a very big stand in capacity, but only in design

4) With the space behind the current EE, would it not make sense to build a a two-tier structure that goes deep into the space behind instead of going on height?

5) Why build a new stand that only boosts capacity by only 1,500 seats? Does that warrant the EE being demolished? Not in my opinion. If we were to put an 7-8,000 stand there with two tiers of 4,000 and hospitatily boxes running across the middle than it would be something to boost the club and gates potentially around 24,000, otherwise I really don't see the point of it.

6) Why are the fans not considered when such developments are proposed?

As Sexstone says: "The stand will be as tall as our current planning permission allows - making it bigger than the Dolman Stand - and will offer us a magnificent new facility on matchdays and non-matchdays."

That suggests to me that CS doesn't want to work to provide a facility for the future development of the Gate but is solely interested in commercial ventures only. All we can hope for is that lessons have been learned from the Atyeo some ten years ago and it doesn't resemble something like the 'tall' aboration behind the goal at Walsall because that's what my gut tells me will be created...

[City fan 1982]

replace like for like whats the point two tier stand is better eastenders in the bottom ooer!! prawns in the middle away fans up top fans happy moneymen happy

[tin]

replace like for like whats the point two tier stand is better eastenders in the bottom ooer!! prawns in the middle away fans up top fans happy moneymen happy

What's the point in a stand that dwarfs the Dolman yet only holds 5,300 when it only boosts capacity by only 1,500 seats?

[City_pete1]

What's the point in a stand that dwarfs the Dolman yet only holds 5,300 when it only boosts capacity by only 1,500 seats?

Money!

[tin]

Money!

1,500 seats (that aren't guaranteed to sell) at say £20 a pop. What's that worth £30k a game plus the prawn sandwiches?

My point is that I don't think this has been thoroughly thought through. There was a chance to put a top draw stand down there, something that would've really done justice to the East End, yet CS chose to boost capacity by only 1,500 or so when we should be looking to take the capacity to 23-24k and give the fans a brilliant all round stand for views, value and atmosphere...

[RedTop]

Before people start questioning why I haven't raised this on the other main EE thread, it's because I've got some major concerns that I believe deserve there own thread to be debated on.

As a season ticket holder in the Atyeo stand, I feel that it was constructed very poorly with minimal effort put into research, especially when it come to the acoustics. Yet as of next year we're going to have a 5,300 stand that dwarfs the Dolman.

That suggests to me the following things:

1) It's going to be a very steep stand if it dwarfs the Dolman which will most likely be to the detriment of the atmosphere.

2) Does it mean construction commencing in a year's time means it'll be ready for the 08/09 season, if so, that stinks of a botch job to me...

3) It's design is purely based around corporate hospitality because 5,300 isn't a very big stand in capacity, but only in design

4) With the space behind the current EE, would it not make sense to build a a two-tier structure that goes deep into the space behind instead of going on height?

5) Why build a new stand that only boosts capacity by only 1,500 seats? Does that warrant the EE being demolished? Not in my opinion. If we were to put an 7-8,000 stand there with two tiers of 4,000 and hospitatily boxes running across the middle than it would be something to boost the club and gates potentially around 24,000, otherwise I really don't see the point of it.

6) Why are the fans not considered when such developments are proposed?

As Sexstone says: "The stand will be as tall as our current planning permission allows - making it bigger than the Dolman Stand - and will offer us a magnificent new facility on matchdays and non-matchdays."

That suggests to me that CS doesn't want to work to provide a facility for the future development of the Gate but is solely interested in commercial ventures only. All we can hope for is that lessons have been learned from the Atyeo some ten years ago and it doesn't resemble something like the 'tall' aboration behind the goal at Walsall because that's what my gut tells me will be created...

1. So you'd rather have a shallow rake where people can't see than a steeper one where people can? It's a myth to suggest the rake affects the atmosphere. The best away atmosphere was at Swansea, where there's a steepish rake and a high roof. It's about the people in the stand, not how steep the rake is.

2. You surely don't have the information or the qualification to decide so far in advance that it's going to be a botch job!

3. It's bigger than what we have. You don't seem to grasp the importance to the club of bringing in another reliable stream of income on the 13 days out of 14 that the ground isn't used for first team home games, let alone the long cash-barren summer.

4. We don't own the car park behind the Dolman. The council does. We lease it. It wouldn't make sense to build our ground on land someone else owns!

5. The East End is past its sell-by date. It's coming to the end of its useful life and it needs replacing, like it or not.

6. Er. They are. Hence we'll get better facilities. Not to mention that SteveL has decided to open the East End in response to the campaign by supporters. I can't for the life of me see the evidence on which you base your assertion that the club has not considered the fans.

Some people will moan about anything. Personally, I was disappointed that the East End stand isn't going to be two-tier and have a bigger capacity. But if the club can't afford it, then the club can't afford it. We will get a decent new stand that will improve the ground considerably. Hell, we might even see our 'name' bricks go into the wall. It's a reason to be happy, not to whinge. Unless you're willing to foot the shortfall for a two-tier stand with a bigger capacity?

[Robbored]

What's the point of another thread which raises no different points than the other one ?

Its upto the mods to integrate them I guess.

[Bristol_Badger]

Before people start questioning why I haven't raised this on the other main EE thread, it's because I've got some major concerns that I believe deserve there own thread to be debated on.

As a season ticket holder in the Atyeo stand, I feel that it was constructed very poorly with minimal effort put into research, especially when it come to the acoustics. Yet as of next year we're going to have a 5,300 stand that dwarfs the Dolman.

That suggests to me the following things:

1) It's going to be a very steep stand if it dwarfs the Dolman which will most likely be to the detriment of the atmosphere.

2) Does it mean construction commencing in a year's time means it'll be ready for the 08/09 season, if so, that stinks of a botch job to me...

3) It's design is purely based around corporate hospitality because 5,300 isn't a very big stand in capacity, but only in design

4) With the space behind the current EE, would it not make sense to build a a two-tier structure that goes deep into the space behind instead of going on height?

5) Why build a new stand that only boosts capacity by only 1,500 seats? Does that warrant the EE being demolished? Not in my opinion. If we were to put an 7-8,000 stand there with two tiers of 4,000 and hospitatily boxes running across the middle than it would be something to boost the club and gates potentially around 24,000, otherwise I really don't see the point of it.

6) Why are the fans not considered when such developments are proposed?

As Sexstone says: "The stand will be as tall as our current planning permission allows - making it bigger than the Dolman Stand - and will offer us a magnificent new facility on matchdays and non-matchdays."

That suggests to me that CS doesn't want to work to provide a facility for the future development of the Gate but is solely interested in commercial ventures only. All we can hope for is that lessons have been learned from the Atyeo some ten years ago and it doesn't resemble something like the 'tall' aboration behind the goal at Walsall because that's what my gut tells me will be created...

Just to clarify... which stand is selling Prawn Sandwiches next season??

[bh_red]

Before people start questioning why I haven't raised this on the other main EE thread, it's because I've got some major concerns that I believe deserve there own thread to be debated on.

As a season ticket holder in the Atyeo stand, I feel that it was constructed very poorly with minimal effort put into research, especially when it come to the acoustics. Yet as of next year we're going to have a 5,300 stand that dwarfs the Dolman.

That suggests to me the following things:

1) It's going to be a very steep stand if it dwarfs the Dolman which will most likely be to the detriment of the atmosphere.

it will be as steep as the dolman and their isn't a problem in that stand

2) Does it mean construction commencing in a year's time means it'll be ready for the 08/09 season, if so, that stinks of a botch job to me...

No, it would be impossible to knock down and rebuild a stand in 2 months, it takes around 15mths for the total job, similar to the atyeo - common sense

3) It's design is purely based around corporate hospitality because 5,300 isn't a very big stand in capacity, but only in design

it's design is based around trying to get as much seating and corporate space into the same space the east end occupys

4) With the space behind the current EE, would it not make sense to build a a two-tier structure that goes deep into the space behind instead of going on height?

the space behind the east end, is half a council owned car park, and half private housings gardens, which means space is depth is limited for a 2 tier stand, hence the plan was scrapped and therefore they are making as big possible single tier stand......BASICALLY THEIR ISN'T THE SPACE

5) Why build a new stand that only boosts capacity by only 1,500 seats? Does that warrant the EE being demolished? Not in my opinion. If we were to put an 7-8,000 stand there with two tiers of 4,000 and hospitatily boxes running across the middle than it would be something to boost the club and gates potentially around 24,000, otherwise I really don't see the point of it.

see above, it's not possible to build a two tier stand, due to the severe lack of space

6) Why are the fans not considered when such developments are proposed?

why should they?

As Sexstone says: "The stand will be as tall as our current planning permission allows - making it bigger than the Dolman Stand - and will offer us a magnificent new facility on matchdays and non-matchdays."

That suggests to me that CS doesn't want to work to provide a facility for the future development of the Gate but is solely interested in commercial ventures only. All we can hope for is that lessons have been learned from the Atyeo some ten years ago and it doesn't resemble something like the 'tall' aboration behind the goal at Walsall because that's what my gut tells me will be created...

Sexstone is just a puppet on a string, SL is the man to speak to, but info suggests planning permission has pretty much ruled out a two tier stand at the east end of the ground, hence they are replacing with as big and modern stand as they can

once that has done, they can deal with the redevelopment of the williams stand, once that's completed the ground will be at almost 30k........in theory

[NickJ]

1. So you'd rather have a shallow rake where people can't see than a steeper one where people can? It's a myth to suggest the rake affects the atmosphere. The best away atmosphere was at Swansea, where there's a steepish rake and a high roof. It's about the people in the stand, not how steep the rake is.

2. You surely don't have the information or the qualification to decide so far in advance that it's going to be a botch job!

3. It's bigger than what we have. You don't seem to grasp the importance to the club of bringing in another reliable stream of income on the 13 days out of 14 that the ground isn't used for first team home games, let alone the long cash-barren summer.

4. We don't own the car park behind the Dolman. The council does. We lease it. It wouldn't make sense to build our ground on land someone else owns!

5. The East End is past its sell-by date. It's coming to the end of its useful life and it needs replacing, like it or not.

6. Er. They are. Hence we'll get better facilities. Not to mention that SteveL has decided to open the East End in response to the campaign by supporters. I can't for the life of me see the evidence on which you base your assertion that the club has not considered the fans.

Some people will moan about anything. Personally, I was disappointed that the East End stand isn't going to be two-tier and have a bigger capacity. But if the club can't afford it, then the club can't afford it. We will get a decent new stand that will improve the ground considerably. Hell, we might even see our 'name' bricks go into the wall. It's a reason to be happy, not to whinge. Unless you're willing to foot the shortfall for a two-tier stand with a bigger capacity?

RedTop I think Tin raises valid points.

1. Its being sold as a giant stand when in fact there are no more seats in it.

2. I'm no construction expert but if it took 5 years to build Wembley, 3 months to build a decent stand seems quite an achievement to me.

3. It wont be used 13 out of 14 days. Not anywhere near it. The DEH isnt, the Premier Club isnt. Sure, it will be used, but my gut instinct is that if this project is being left to the man who told us the Premier Seating would be sold out within 2 months, well, I fear for the worst.

4. It wouldnt be impossible to buy the land from the council. I doubt very much we pay that much rent for it, so it would make economic sense for both organisations. Even council employees arent that daft.

5. Who says? Its just a piece of terracing, with seats, with a roof. It works. What is so essential to be replaced, until the time is right?

6. Er. The fans have not been consulted about the new stand. In the meantime, as a token gesture, the fans are given 1,000 out of 5,500 capacity of their "home". Even Lansdown, Sexstone, et al, could not ignore the weight of opinion in support of the EE any longer, and by god, they tried hard enough - I saw that with my own eyes.

People aren't moaning Brian, they are making what I consider to be valid points worthy of consideration. To suggest otherwise makes you sound like a certain cretin and having read most of your recent posts with interest I am disappointed you could suggest this.

I think the point many people are making, myself included, is that, fine, we appreciate the intentions, but why not consider better alternatives or wait if necessary till those better alternatives are achievable.

SteveL has said to me that he sometimes thought it would be better if we had a 10,000 capacity stadium sold out every week, rather than a large half empty stadium. Believe me, he was not entirely joking. I'm beginning to see (well, I saw it a long time ago, actually) that the master plan is to significantly increase the percentage of prawn sandwich munchers, just like every other club.

You and others will now bang on about money, blah blah. I'm fortunate that isnt an issue to me, but earlier I had a few beers with somebody who laments the fact that:

a) terracing is no longer at football

b) the atmosphere isnt what it used to be

c) football is in any case financially out of his reach on a regular basis

A story I hear oh so often.

That is why my preference is to build a large stand affordable to all, rather than keep the capacity small with the inevitable result that the few who can afford to do so will pay inflated prices while the many who cannot, well, they do not attend.

I do believe you have to think about who are the individuals making these decisions on behalf Bristol City and its fans, and what their motives are. Rugby isn't a mass spectator sport.

[bh_red]

4. It wouldnt be impossible to buy the land from the council. I doubt very much we pay that much rent for it, so it would make economic sense for both organisations. Even council employees arent that daft.

what I don't get is how people keep missing the point, the Car Park only covers around half the back of the East End, the rest of it is the house's in the streets behind,

I can't imagine too many of the home-owners are too keen on a big stand being built, but will accept it because the ground was their when they bought their homes, however I'd say there is almost zero chance that ALL of the home owners would be willing to sell up most of their gardens/land to build an even bigger stand.

That seems to be the key problem with building a two tier stand,

THE SPACE - not just the car park, but the homes, which is why we are building as big a stand as we possibly can, I'd love a two tier stand with 7k fans but it's highly unlikely to happen,

unless we want a two tier stand like Brentford?

[Gerry Gows' Tash]

I'm beginning to see (well, I saw it a long time ago, actually) that the master plan is to significantly increase the percentage of prawn sandwich munchers, just like every other club.

I've seen it comig too. The fatal flaw in the master plan is that outside the top 6 clubs in the prem (i.e regular European football and a team full of internationals) the prawn sandwich market simply isn't that big - that's why the premier seating took so long to sell and was often half empty this season. Offering someone a box for the day at Stanford bridge could well seal a deal, the same isn't true at the Gate.

[cider head]

it would be nice if the stand was built like charltons, fill the corners in

and put corp boxes in the middle.

[Ian M]

1) It's going to be a very steep stand if it dwarfs the Dolman which will most likely be to the detriment of the atmosphere.

4) With the space behind the current EE, would it not make sense to build a a two-tier structure that goes deep into the space behind instead of going on height?

Wouldn't the atmosphere be louder if the same number of people were closer to the pitch than further away?

5) Why build a new stand that only boosts capacity by only 1,500 seats? Does that warrant the EE being demolished? Not in my opinion. If we were to put an 7-8,000 stand there with two tiers of 4,000 and hospitatily boxes running across the middle than it would be something to boost the club and gates potentially around 24,000, otherwise I really don't see the point of it.

Because we (currently) lose money each season. This money lost is money that hasn't been made available to Gary Johnson. The conferencing facilities inside the stand will help us lose less money. This will as a result give Gary Johnson more money to spend on making the team successfull.

That suggests to me that CS doesn't want to work to provide a facility for the future development of the Gate but is solely interested in commercial ventures only.

....and quite right too.

CS sole aim should be to make as much money as possible for Gary Johnson to spend on the footballing side. I don't really understand why CS gets so much stick for attempting to increase our revenue streams. Ok consideration has to be paid to not pissing off the existing fanbase but generally this feels like a club going places at the moment yet all we seem to do is moan.

[CGS RED]

The new stand I imagine will be financed by the Stadium company, not the Football club company. This talk of extra money from conferencing will be revenue for the stadium company, not the football club.

Nick J, you wrote extensively last year on how the 2 company process would benefit SL, so in working mens terms how right is this. The football club pays the stadium company for use of Ashton Gate, no different than conference revenue, or function money for other events, or concert gigs........all of these revenues are funnelled into the stadium company, not the football club. Is that how it works ?

As a footnote : Our Lord Mayor in his post match speech on the Green said this. His administration will do everything it can to assist BCFC with any plans or progress it requires to advance the name of Bristol as a Championship Football City.

Lets use that little voucher before he forgets. Building approvals, parking and buses come to mind. How about some free land for a new stadium, 50% rebates for all City fan rate payers, free buses to home games.........vote for me ?