Stadium Flyer Questions Results

[Blagdon red]

The responses to the five stadium survey 'taster' questions included on the Supporters Trust flyers distributed at the Plymouth game have now been collated and can be viewed here:

Stadium survey 'taster' question results

Barring any last minute hiccoughs, the main survey will be available at the end of this week. If you have an e-mail address on the club's database, you should receive a mail with a link to an online version of the survey. Otherwise, printed copies will be available in the club shop.

In compiling the survey, drafts have been shared with the full board and other members of the Supporters Trust, members of the Supporters Club, FCF and City Foundation and with users of this forum (an early draft was posted in the New Stadium section) and feedback and suggestions have been taken on board from all quarters. Hopefully it therefore covers all of the main issues that fans feel should be surveyed.

So, look out for a mail (probably on Friday) or pick up a printed copy from the shop - and have your say!

[cidercity1987]

54% misguidedly want an oval shape!

[elhombrecito]

54% misguidedly want an oval shape!

Oh dear, oh dear.

[bh_red]

some interesting results, however VERY disapointing how many actually cared to reply, It's OUR ground and I wish MORE people would have taken the 1minute of their time to reply even at this early stage.

the 100% seating v 10% standing was ALOT closer than I expected, though the other results are pretty much as expected I reckon.

[Guest Zider_I_Up_Landlord]

some interesting results, however VERY disapointing how many actually cared to reply, It's OUR ground and I wish MORE people would have taken the 1minute of their time to reply even at this early stage.

the 100% seating v 10% standing was ALOT closer than I expected, though the other results are pretty much as expected I reckon.

The 100% seating v 10% standing is not really ever going to show a true reading. Because if 10% of the ground want "10% of the stadium" to be for safe standing, then that is enough to justify it.

Also, why would you tick the box for 100% seating. That to me just seems pretty childish that someone who likes to sit would not be happy with 10% of the ground standing and only happy if everyone was seated. is 90% of the ground not enough!

ziul

[East End Lad]

I thought more would be in favor or the 10% standing but evidently not. Good to see that more are for it then against at this early stage though.

Just for interest, anyone who voted for 100% seating why was this? (Not saying your wrong, just be interesting to see what the views are).

Not really a surprise to see more want a oval shape as well.

Generally its as expected.

[Nibor]

I seem to have completely missed this happening somehow.

I think the survey as it appears covers the topics that seem to be cared about most but it's format could be far more useful.

For example, phrase the questions like this:

The new stadium should make provision for a small (10%) safe standing area.

a- Strongly Disagree

b- Disagree

c- Don't care

d- Agree

e- Strongly Agree

This will give you some idea of the strength of feeling.

It might be for example that 45% of people think it's absolutely massively important that the stadium is all seater, and that 49% would prefer a small safe standing section but don't really care.

In that case choosing the majority opinion option would generate far more dissatisfaction than the other.

Also, the last question is leading and pretty pointless.

[tin]

I seem to have completely missed this happening somehow.

+1. I never even knew of this until now. :noexpression:

[sunningdalered]

The answer to this might be obvious given the question in the survey - but, is it up to each club to decide how much standing they offer? what happened to the rules about making all stadium all-seater?

[Nibor]

The answer to this might be obvious given the question in the survey - but, is it up to each club to decide how much standing they offer? what happened to the rules about making all stadium all-seater?

Of course it's up to the club, the idea of this is to tell the club what the fans want so they can consider it when making decisions.

Safe standing actually meets the all seater requirements because you are allocated a specific seat, it's just that it's designed so that it's safe for you to stand up if you like. Standing in normal seated areas is prohibited by safety certificates because it isn't safe, not because it's against the law or anything.

[bh_red]

The 100% seating v 10% standing is not really ever going to show a true reading. Because if 10% of the ground want "10% of the stadium" to be for safe standing, then that is enough to justify it.

Also, why would you tick the box for 100% seating. That to me just seems pretty childish that someone who likes to sit would not be happy with 10% of the ground standing and only happy if everyone was seated. is 90% of the ground not enough!

ziul

it depends though how many people vote on any survey though, if as with this survey, then only 500odd people voted, then you only need 60 people to vote? which isn't going to be any type of reflective view, obviously these numbers or only an early indictor and a larger scale survey will be done closer to the time with more questions and hopefully a few thousand replies at least.

I voted 100%, because I prefer all seater stadiums, it's not about being childish, it's my view and there is no need to belittle people if they disagree with what you want,

[East End Lad]

The answer to this might be obvious given the question in the survey - but, is it up to each club to decide how much standing they offer? what happened to the rules about making all stadium all-seater?

A club in the Premier League or the Championship must play in an all seater stadium. Cardiff are allowed to get around this at the moment but they are building a new stadium which will be all seater I believe.

That means that yes, if we were to build a new stadium with 10% standing on offer the rules would have to change. I think though that in time they will, and I would be suprised if by 2015 we don't have safe standing back in English football.

[Nibor]

it depends though how many people vote on any survey though, if as with this survey, then only 500odd people voted, then you only need 60 people to vote? which isn't going to be any type of reflective view,

Actually for a population of 50,000, a random sample size of 500 will give you a +/-4% confidence interval in a 50/50 result.

That means that you can be statistically certain that the real %age is within 4% of the one shown by the survey.

It's perfectly provable.

[sunningdalered]

Of course it's up to the club, the idea of this is to tell the club what the fans want so they can consider it when making decisions.

Safe standing actually meets the all seater requirements because you are allocated a specific seat, it's just that it's designed so that it's safe for you to stand up if you like. Standing in normal seated areas is prohibited by safety certificates because it isn't safe, not because it's against the law or anything.

Oh right - understand. Bit of a no-brainer then isnt it - giving over x% of the ground to standing. I guess the only objection people might have is a concern that it might be the rows directly in front of their seats that are standing - not sure I understand their objection otherwise !

[bh_red]

Actually for a population of 50,000, a random sample size of 500 will give you a +/-4% confidence interval in a 50/50 result.

That means that you can be statistically certain that the real %age is within 4% of the one shown by the survey.

It's perfectly provable.

ahh....but if A+C=ZY & B-F=YT.......then....... :noexpression: I'm off for a lie down.

[Blagdon red]

I seem to have completely missed this happening somehow.

I think the survey as it appears covers the topics that seem to be cared about most but it's format could be far more useful.

For example, phrase the questions like this:

The new stadium should make provision for a small (10%) safe standing area.

a- Strongly Disagree

b- Disagree

c- Don't care

d- Agree

e- Strongly Agree

This will give you some idea of the strength of feeling.

It might be for example that 45% of people think it's absolutely massively important that the stadium is all seater, and that 49% would prefer a small safe standing section but don't really care.

In that case choosing the majority opinion option would generate far more dissatisfaction than the other.

Also, the last question is leading and pretty pointless.

Sorry you missed it - as well as 8,500 flyers handed out at the Plymouth game there was a pinned post on here offering a PDF version for 4 or 5 days and a draft of the main survey has been in the new stadium sub-forum since March 28th. Anyway, not to worry - the main survey is the biggie and will give you chance to have your say.

The space on the flyer didn't really permit a range of answers asking about strength of feeling. The flyer questions were also only ever intended as a taster ahead of the main event in any case.

The main survey format is designed to gauge strength of feeling as well as simple 'yes' / 'no' responses. At the end of it, for example, you will be asked to state which of your answers you would be most desperate for the architects to bear in mind if you were told they would take only 3 of these into account.

[bh_red]

I seem to have completely missed this happening somehow.

I think the survey as it appears covers the topics that seem to be cared about most but it's format could be far more useful.

For example, phrase the questions like this:

The new stadium should make provision for a small (10%) safe standing area.

a- Strongly Disagree

b- Disagree

c- Don't care

d- Agree

e- Strongly Agree

This will give you some idea of the strength of feeling.

It might be for example that 45% of people think it's absolutely massively important that the stadium is all seater, and that 49% would prefer a small safe standing section but don't really care.

In that case choosing the majority opinion option would generate far more dissatisfaction than the other.

Also, the last question is leading and pretty pointless.

they were giving them out at the Plymouth(???) game at most of the entrances, got my from BS3, the group I go with who go in the dolman all got them on entry and the lot I was with also ours going into the atyeo, lad from work got his emailed to him from Blagdon I believe after he PM'd him.

I recall the questions and text number were posted on here, due to "other fans" trying to hijack the vote

there was also a few postings on here about it prior to it happening, plus a number of appeals for people to hand out leaflets?

[Mr Popodopolous]

Results to all 5 questions pretty much as expected, except for the Oval shocker.

Why oh why would people want a prototype bowl, that's just the same as all the other bowls round the country?

[Nibor]

they were giving them out at the Plymouth(???) game at most of the entrances, got my from BS3, the group I go with who go in the dolman all got them on entry and the lot I was with also ours going into the atyeo, lad from work got his emailed to him from Blagdon I believe after he PM'd him.

I recall the questions and text number were posted on here, due to "other fans" trying to hijack the vote

there was also a few postings on here about it prior to it happening, plus a number of appeals for people to hand out leaflets?

I was at the Plymouth game and didn't receive one or see anyone handing them out around the Dolman entrance.

I've not noticed it on here to be honest but then I've been fairly busy.

[Chessels Chick]

Results to all 5 questions pretty much as expected, except for the Oval shocker.

Why oh why would people want a prototype bowl, that's just the same as all the other bowls round the country?

Hear hear - no to Oval shape - Rectangular all the way for me!

[Nibor]

Sorry you missed it - as well as 8,500 flyers handed out at the Plymouth game there was a pinned post on here offering a PDF version for 4 or 5 days and a draft of the main survey has been in the new stadium sub-forum since March 28th. Anyway, not to worry - the main survey is the biggie and will give you chance to have your say.

The space on the flyer didn't really permit a range of answers asking about strength of feeling. The flyer questions were also only ever intended as a taster ahead of the main event in any case.

The main survey format is designed to gauge strength of feeling as well as simple 'yes' / 'no' responses. At the end of it, for example, you will be asked to state which of your answers you would be most desperate for the architects to bear in mind if you were told they would take only 3 of these into account.

Thanks for the reply, I guess I just didn't see it. I reckon my brain automatically filters out pinned posts.

I'll look out for the main survey.

[Nibor]

ahh....but if A+C=ZY & B-F=YT.......then....... :noexpression: I'm off for a lie down.

Well, stats maths is pretty damn simple really and if you're doing a survey like this it's well worth being aware of.

What you were saying is a pretty typical problem for anyone using a survey, people will look at results they don't agree with and pull the old "well it's only a small survey" line to allow them to dismiss the results.

A basic understand of how stats work makes the results far harder for people to dismiss just because they don't reflect their personal views.

[jellyred]

Stats maths is RUBBASH!!

The closest I got to it was when I was at Uni, turned up to my exam for it drunk, wrote my name on the paper and promptly left. Great days, great days......

[Guest tombcfc]

So has this "Main questionaire" been emailed yet? I haven't recieved one. Will they be available at the club shop on Saturday?

[Blagdon red]

So has this "Main questionaire" been emailed yet? I haven't recieved one. Will they be available at the club shop on Saturday?

No and yes.

All being well, the link to online version will be mailed on Friday and printed versions available in the shop on Saturday.

[Guest tombcfc]

No and yes.

All being well, the link to online version will be mailed on Friday and printed versions available in the shop on Saturday.

Perfect, thanks

[Cider Queen]

[old_man_terry]

[Nibor]

as others have stated though, it's just small survey

[Flaxbourton Red]

it depends though how many people vote on any survey though, if as with this survey, then only 500odd people voted, then you only need 60 people to vote? which isn't going to be any type of reflective view, obviously these numbers or only an early indictor and a larger scale survey will be done closer to the time with more questions and hopefully a few thousand replies at least.

I voted 100%, because I prefer all seater stadiums, it's not about being childish, it's my view and there is no need to belittle people if they disagree with what you want,

but surely the events at southampton last week are proof that all seater stadiums do not work

[Flaxbourton Red]

my view is.......

a) it looks 80's and BLOODY DISGUSTING

and

b) don't know about all the german grounds but the ones I've personally seen with "safe standing" all have fencing at the bottom!!!

that has got to be one of the strongest arguements for ignoring your opinion

[cidercity1987]

[Flaxbourton Red]

[Nibor]

I just don’t like stadiums with 4 sides and open bits. In my opinion (and it is MY opinion), they’re windy, look messy and the acoustics aren’t as good, I like a nice enclosed stadium, ie the Stadium of Light Sunderland. Incidentally I also liked St Marys ground, I also like the Emirates.

I want a modern ground with all sides looking the same and not a mishmash as Ashton Gate is now. It’s horrible. I don’t like Old Trafford either for that reason, so the only option was an oval shape.

Personally I'd like a rectangular stadium with distinct stands (not a mish mash) with the corners enclosed, much like OneCity's design on the sub forum. I'd like it to be the same height all round and not irregular, but having open corners or an oval always seems to lead to a poor atmosphere to me.

That is SO 1980’s. I guess it’s fine if you’re under a certain age, male and over 5’ 10’’ tall. But I’m not interested in standing. I enjoy watching the match from my seat (and yes I do sing, shout and jump up and down) but again my opinion is that I wouldn’t want a standing area as I wouldn’t use it.

The only thing I don't understand about this is why people who have no interest in safe standing have an interest in stopping other people from having those facilities.

I think perhaps rather than asking what people think should happen, the question the trust should be asking should be:

If safe standing areas were available behind each goal, would you use consider using them?

[old_man_terry]

why the sarcasm? it was just a small "taster" survey? and was described as so when it was sent out?

there was 5 questions? each with a 3 selected options?

[Frome Valley]

No and yes.

All being well, the link to online version will be mailed on Friday and printed versions available in the shop on Saturday.

What will happen after this and will there be further surveys?

[old_man_terry]

that has got to be one of the strongest arguements for ignoring your opinion

why? because it's different than yours? this is the typical point that myself and the previous poster made?

those who shout loudest?

http://www.fussballtempel.net/uefa/GER/Borussia-Park.html

I look at this link, and the staduim looks great......until you see the terracing area......yuk.

[Nibor]

why the sarcasm? it was just a small "taster" survey? and was described as so when it was sent out?

there was 5 questions? each with a 3 selected options?

See above with reference to the "it's just a small survey" comment. Seemed quite ironic to me when you look at the similarity of the views expressed.

[old_man_terry]

but surely the events at southampton last week are proof that all seater stadiums do not work

No, what happened at Southampton, proved that BAD stewarding and policing creates problems, if the steward had kept the idiots out of the gangways and had moved them into the free seats on the back row. Then the problems would have been fine

It's nothing to do with all seater/terracing/safe standing, unfortunately was to do with people acting like scum

Southampton had no problems creating an atmosphere in the areas that they wanted to.....

[Frome Valley]

http://www.fussballtempel.net/uefa/GER/Borussia-Park.html

I look at this link, and the staduim looks great......until you see the terracing area......yuk.

http://schokoladenseiten.files.wordpress.c...w=239&h=180

Looks better now though.

[Nibor]

I look at this link, and the staduim looks great......until you see the terracing area......yuk.

Why you worried about how it looks empty?

Besides that photo shows old style terracing not safe standing which will look far more like seating.

[Blagdon red]

What will happen after this and will there be further surveys?

At this point the Trust does not intend to do any further surveys, although the club, of course, may do so themselves.

Our intention is to analyse the results and present these in a document to the club, including some visual interpretations of the findings by people like One City, who has volunteered to show in pictorial form what the consensus wishes of the fans appear to be.

Hopefully that document will help to inform decisions taken by the club and architects in due course.

Obviously a stadium can't be planned 'by committee', but it will undoubtedly help the club and the architects to get a steer from the fans on what are the major likes and dislikes.

[Cider Queen]

its sooo 80s? oh dear get trinny and suzannah on the case, may be we can put some laminate flooring in there to spruce it up a bit

what a short sighted and pathetic arguement

Why because I don't happen to agree with you!!

Sorry about that.. I'll ask for my opinion to be changed just so you and I agree, is that ok??

[old_man_terry]

Why you worried about how it looks empty?

Besides that photo shows old style terracing not safe standing which will look far more like seating.

for the same reason that people moaned about getting Dolman seats changed to the current ones.......the look.

yes, that picture shows old fashioned terrancing, yet that is still a new ground in germany, however as per the pic in my previous posting, even the "safe standing" areas look disgusting.

plus as previous stated in other postings, but everyone has conviently ignored, the "safe standing" areas are all seem to be penned in with fencing at the bottom of the stands, if that's not back to the 80's I don't know, getting caged into a stand like animals.

no thanks. not for me and hopefully not for my club.

[Frome Valley]

for the same reason that people moaned about getting Dolman seats changed to the current ones.......the look.

yes, that picture shows old fashioned terrancing, yet that is still a new ground in germany, however as per the pic in my previous posting, even the "safe standing" areas look disgusting.

plus as previous stated in other postings, but everyone has conviently ignored, the "safe standing" areas are all seem to be penned in with fencing at the bottom of the stands, if that's not back to the 80's I don't know, getting caged into a stand like animals.

no thanks. not for me and hopefully not for my club.

Fences at the front of stands in England no longer exist due to the Taylor report even at new stadiums with terraces.

[bringbacktherobin]

Old man terry, fences are widely used in europe, not just in safe standing areas but everywhere around the ground.

Holland have moats etc around the pitch aswell.

[Flaxbourton Red]

Why because I don't happen to agree with you!!

no, because your arguement is lame, inconsistant and lacks substance.

[Flaxbourton Red]

why? because it's different than yours? this is the typical point that myself and the previous poster made?

those who shout loudest?

http://www.fussballtempel.net/uefa/GER/Borussia-Park.html

I look at this link, and the staduim looks great......until you see the terracing area......yuk.

it seems that you have weird aversion to people standing up

you must hate it at the final whistle when everybody gets up from their little plastic seat

[bringbacktherobin]

ojjy, you voted no to 10% standing because you don't want to stand.

How about the other 90% of the stadium? Maybe you could sit down in that?

Just a idea.

So what if it is SO 1980's? You have the choice to sit down, why cant i have the choice to stand up?

Only fair isnt it?

[Flaxbourton Red]

no thanks. not for me and hopefully not for my club.

why do you want to force people sit down when they do not want to sit down?

Have you ever had people stand up in front of you and block your view?

Shouldn't people have a choice how they want to watch football when they are spending £25+ for a ticket?

[Robbored]

The bottom line as always is about how much the stadium will cost. I've no doubt that a budget has been set and that everything has to fall into said budget.

That will mean that whatever is the cheapest design will get the most attention regardless of what the fans might want.Everything will be determined by the budget.

I haven't taken part in the survey as I suspect that its not much more than a paper exercise.

[Guest Eamer]

I don't like the look of standing areas but voted no view in the flyer. I can't see it happening anyway...

[Squeak]

I really can't understand the blinkered view presented by those who oppose a safe standing area. So you don't want to stand, thats fine, but why deny others the opportunity to do so? Old man terry and ojjy, I'm asking this question to you and anyone else who voted the same way.

[Cider Queen]

[Guest scumbag]

I really can't understand the blinkered view presented by those who oppose a safe standing area. So you don't want to stand, thats fine, but why deny others the opportunity to do so? Old man terry and ojjy, I'm asking this question to you and anyone else who voted the same way.

I voted Oval and I also voted for 100% all seater.

any "safe standing/terraced" grounds in germany look GREAT apart from the previosly mentioned areas which just make a ground look old fashioned, prefer the look of All seater grounds.

and

as far as all current rulings are, there is no current provision for safe standing, I want the new ground to happen asap for the long term benefit of the club, I don't want it delay for something that, may/may not even happen in the future.

some of the current dome's around the country do look good, however other are crap, Derby, Leicester, Reading, Swansea are some of the horrible bland stadiums.

But when compared to the Emirates they are not all bad.......personally I'd be delighted with a scaled down version of the Emirates.

That's my view. You can moan all you like about it, I'm sure some will agree, I'm sure some will disagree......but that's just your view.

[Blagdon red]

The bottom line as always is about how much the stadium will cost. I've no doubt that a budget has been set and that everything has to fall into said budget.

That will mean that whatever is the cheapest design will get the most attention regardless of what the fans might want.Everything will be determined by the budget.

I haven't taken part in the survey as I suspect that its not much more than a paper exercise.

Of course budget will play a part, but don't we all at times set ourselves a budget for a particular purchase and then find the spec of the next version up so tempting that we push the boat out just that bit more to get it and end up going some way over what we meant to spend, but are later glad we did.

I'd like to think that might happen here.

As for being a 'paper exercise', I'm sure that if only a handful of people respond to the full survey, then it won't carry much weight with the club. However, if large numbers do take the trouble to make their views known, then clearly the club will take note. I'm not saying that every wish will be granted, but anybody constructing a new building - be it a house or a stadium - can only be helped in their work by knowing in advance the likes and dislikes of the people who are going to be using it.

In short, the more fans that take part, the more weight the findings will carry. When you get your e-mail with the link or pick up a printed copy at the club shop, I'd therefore urge you to have your say.

[Nibor]

as far as all current rulings are, there is no current provision for safe standing

There doesn't need to be as you are sold an allocated seat and it isn't terracing.

But when compared to the Emirates and Southampton they are not all bad.......personally I'd be delighted with a scaled down version of the Emirates.

The Emirates cost £390m. A scaled down version isn't going to happen unless the price tag is 1/10th of that and it won't be.

[Guest scumbag]

There doesn't need to be as you are sold an allocated seat and it isn't terracing.

The Emirates cost £390m. A scaled down version isn't going to happen unless the price tag is 1/10th of that and it won't be.

that was done at London prices though,

just need to comapre it to the price of the Mill Stad which also involved knocking down the old Cardiff Arms Park, bargain at £126m.

[Flaxbourton Red]

Absolutely correct. I don't want to stand so I voted no to a standing area.

oh i get it:

you don't want to stand so nobody else can have the opportunity to stand

great

[Guest Almondsbury_red]

Of course budget will play a part, but don't we all at times set ourselves a budget for a particular purchase and then find the spec of the next version up so tempting that we push the boat out just that bit more to get it and end up going some way over what we meant to spend, but are later glad we did.

I'd like to think that might happen here.

As for being a 'paper exercise', I'm sure that if only a handful of people respond to the full survey, then it won't carry much weight with the club. However, if large numbers do take the trouble to make their views known, then clearly the club will take note. I'm not saying that every wish will be granted, but anybody constructing a new building - be it a house or a stadium - can only be helped in their work by knowing in advance the likes and dislikes of the people who are going to be using it.

In short, the more fans that take part, the more weight the findings will carry. When you get your e-mail with the link or pick up a printed copy at the club shop, I'd therefore urge you to have your say.

when will the printed copies be available from the shop?

[Robbored]

It would good imo to have an area of terracing that was available to whoever wanted to use it. It would appeal to me if I had the option of standing at the odd game if I decided to.

The view would have to decent though or it wouldn't be worth it.

Just to compare. The only difference that I could see between the Walker Stadium and St Mary's was the colour of the seats.They were both very similar and soul less. The Ricoh Arena on the other hand was far more interesting with its 'D' shape.

New stadiums can be very bland and built pretty much to a template.Hopefully (budget allowing) City will build a stadium thats unique to Bristol.

[Blagdon red]

when will the printed copies be available from the shop?

We'll aim to have them in the shop for before the game on Saturday.

[Guest Almondsbury_red]

We'll aim to have them in the shop for before the game on Saturday.

cheers, 1 last question will the survey be emailed to u16 season ticket holders?

[Mrs Miggins Pie Shop]

Do the majority of fans really want an oval stadium? REALLY? I voted for a rectangle and would have bet my bottom dollar that most other supporters would have too.

Other than the aesthetics of having a 'neat and tidy' design, are there actually any advantages to having an oval design?

I can only see the huge and obvious disadvantage of fans at both ends being much further back from the pitch, especially immediately behind the goal.

We've been saying how important it is for the new stadium to enable a good atmosphere, and yet having an oval will mean fans are that much further away from the goalmouth action.

I'd go for the nearness (to the pitch) and intimidating atmosphere of Old Trafford over the spacious bowl of The Emirates any day.

[Guest scumbag]

It would good imo to have an area of terracing that was available to whoever wanted to use it. It would appeal to me if I had the option of standing at the odd game if I decided to.

The view would have to decent though or it wouldn't be worth it.

Just to compare. The only difference that I could see between the Walker Stadium and St Mary's was the colour of the seats.They were both very similar and soul less. The Ricoh Arena on the other hand was far more interesting with its 'D' shape.

New stadiums can be very bland and built pretty much to a template.Hopefully (budget allowing) City will build a stadium thats unique to Bristol.

that's the biggest problem though......some people are expect FAR TOO MUCH, everything points towards the budget being £30m-ish

Cov - Ricoh Arena - £112m

Stadium M:k - £50m

Hull City - KC Stad - £41m

Southampton - St Mary's Stadium £32m

Swansea - Liberty Stadium £27m

Donny Keepmoat Stad - £21m

what do people ACTUALLY expect us to get........it's going to be a concerte bowl with a few add-ons to make it a bit more unqiue

[Blagdon red]

cheers, 1 last question will the survey be emailed to u16 season ticket holders?

Don't know for sure, but if the e-mail is on the club's database, then it should be. They're doing the e-mail mailshot for us. Will hopefully go out on Friday.

[Barry]

Thought i would just make some observations i have on the survey and the replies people have had

1) Theres seems to be differing interpretations of the of 'the basic shapes of the ground' question. It seems that many people take rectangular to mean missmatched stands with gaps betweeh the stands, but this does not necessarliy have to be the case. Most modern ground that are built with this shape in mind tend to have even stands with the corners filled in with corporate facilities or the like. similarly there can be some ambiguity between bowl and a rectangle.

Just looking at onecity's design. ( http://www.otib.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=93781&st=0 ) i'm sure people who voted for a bowl would rather have a stadium like this, than a souless bowl such as the walkers stadium and if there is such an interest in including uniquenees by incorporating a design feature representing bristol, why would people vote for the sort of stadium that could only be differentiated from others by the colour of the seats?

A modernly built stadium with four seprate stands that could either have corners filled partly with seats or corporated facilities would look so much better than a copycat bowl.

Let's get something unique a not get the same ground that others already have!

2) Also thinking the views of 'i wont use safe standing so i wont vote for it' is very narrow minded. Introduces such an area also seeks to BENEFIT people who wish to sit, as this will remove the potential for people to block or disturb their view. I just feel that people who are opposed to safe stnading don't see how it can benefit everybody.

3) Another note on a safe standing area. with the present climate there cannot actually be such a area provided, but with the growing debate on safe standing, there could be the possibility for it to be introduced somewhere down the line. It may therefore be an important consideration that if allowed, such an area may have more popularity, so the designers might want to have a design where there is the possibility for a safe standing section to be put in place.

4) Also we need to remember that safe standing is alot safer than standing at current football stadia