New Stadium, Ashton Gate Revamp, Or Nothing?

[City Ben]

So how's about this for an idea...

City sell Ashton Gate and move to a new site (Long Ashton Red - any ideas where? )

This stadium has been built by an investment company, on a huge complex including hotels/leisure/conferencing etc. The lease it to us at a pepper corn rent on a very long term (say, 99 year) lease.

The money we've made from the sale of AG pays of fall of our debts. Revenue from off-field activities at the new stadium means that the club actually begins to make money on an annual basis.

City become hugely secure financially, are able to afford bigger wages, bigger transfer fees... but they don't own their own ground. What would people think about that?

[Nibor]

So how's about this for an idea...

City sell Ashton Gate and move to a new site (Long Ashton Red - any ideas where? )

This stadium has been built by an investment company, on a huge complex including hotels/leisure/conferencing etc. The lease it to us at a pepper corn rent on a very long term (say, 99 year) lease.

The money we've made from the sale of AG pays of fall of our debts. Revenue from off-field activities at the new stadium means that the club actually begins to make money on an annual basis.

City become hugely secure financially, are able to afford bigger wages, bigger transfer fees... but they don't own their own ground. What would people think about that?

If you don't own your own ground you don't get the revenue from off the field activities.

The revenue coming from the stadium on the other 13 days a fortnight has to be the key reason for redeveloping which is why I think shared ownership or renting makes absolutely no sense.

Rovers' faltering scheme leaves them selling all the revenue generating facilities for a cash lump sum to pay off the finance, so the new stadium if it were ever to happen is just a bunch of seats they won't fill.

[Bristol Boy]

When I say pay for itself in 5 years, I'm talking about money we spend on the existing stadium not the price of redeveloping it completely or building a new one. I don't think it's unrealistic for a redeveloped stand to pay for itself in 5 years, in fact if it doesn't you have to seriously question what the point in spending the money is. If we spend £8m on the East End, and it doesn't pay for itself in 5 or so years, what exactly have we got for our money?

That was my main point when it went from two tier 10,000 to one tier 5,500-In essence we would be spending about £8m to replicate what is already there plus about 1,000 fans as the new one would be 5,500 Segregated, so we are led to believe.I would prefer a two tier 8-10,000 with the corners filled in-I'm still not keen on Exec Boxes behind the goal but I'll bow to superior wisdom if we can flog them there-Old story, I suppose, if we got in The Prem we could flog anything, almost.

If the board did invest £20m in the stadium, say on rebuilding the Williams and EE to be a new L shape stand as they planned a while back, I'd hope that we would significantly increase our turnover as a result. We're talking about non matchday revenue here too which is one of the big drivers behind any redevelopment they do. Large scale conferencing facilities allowing us to work the stadium 7 days a week and proper corporate boxes can add several million coming in every season. Expecting it to take 25 years to pay back is wrong, the facilities will be dated by then and that's 25 years without investing in the other two stands. The days of facilities lasting 50 years without full refits are long gone.

The modern way, at Pride Pk for example, is that the building is what one would call "revamp friendly" that is one can add another level up or refit at a fraction of the cost of revamping what we have at the moment-Build it with maintenance and revamp in mind, so to speak.Either way, I can't see us moving for at least 20/25 years if we rebuild the EE, never mind The Williams.

Mind you, if we do start to rebuild failure (relegation) really is unthinkable particularly if we're depending on the corporate £ to a great degree.

[Bristol Boy]

Its costing SEVEN MILLION pounds despite not having to buy any land, it won't increase the capacity by more than 300 but nobody knows what it really looks like even though it has had planning permission since 2005.

The alarm bells should be ringing loud and clear right now.

It will increase usable capacity by about 1,000.

Then you have to fill it and at £23 (Less Vat) £19.57 that's £19,500 per game x 23 = £450,000 that's if it's full for every game with an adult.That would take 15 years to repay £7m without interest!

I'd really like to see the numbers and how they stack up however, if SL thinks they do, super because we need a new stand-I just hope we do go for the double decker!

[Frome Valley]

It will increase usable capacity by about 1,000.

Then you have to fill it and at £23 (Less Vat) £19.57 that's £19,500 per game x 23 = £450,000 that's if it's full for every game with an adult.That would take 15 years to repay £7m without interest!

I'd really like to see the numbers and how they stack up however, if SL thinks they do, super because we need a new stand-I just hope we do go for the double decker!

City need a new stand but not at seven million plus for five thousand plus seats when maybe there is the opportunity here to sell seats long term to fans if they could see what they are buying into.

Utterly unconvinced that sixteen boxes behind the goal are a good idea but also it will utterly dominate the design instead of being part of the design.