The clubs official statement...

[mossleyblues]

Yup, very ok with it. I'm also pleased that by setting the capacity at 12000 it will mean that I will be able to have two seats to spread my fat arse on and there will be more than enough room for each of us to do the same.

Lol i must be reading things different to you what i read is that we are going to build a arena fit for crown green bowls

...

[Corporal_Jones]

blackpool only holds 9788 in the championship and they dont even sell out teams who have been in the championship before and not filled it etc and have done well are - crewe-10k--gillingham 11k--scunthorpe 9k i dont see how this is a big problem because there will be a chance to extend it. trips to bp have been gettin worse for a few seasons now and its costin the tta 400k a season to keep bp up to the current standard which is crap in all fairness! I for one would rather go to a 3/4 full stadium than have 10 of the 20k seats empty hoping for one big cup game!! if we do go up im sure the tta will have somethin sorted lets get behind them and the lads they have continually pumped cash into the club for players etc

 

 

 

 

Why are we assuming that the new stadium will be nearly full all the time? It's a stadium for a third or fourth division club, and few of these fill their grounds whether new or not.

[Frankly Mr Shankly]

As has been pointed out, nobody is going to mess about building onto a new stadium.

 

Says who?

[leeslover]

As has been pointed out, nobody is going to mess about building onto a new stadium.

 

Anyway, it won't be an issue, as this is a settlement, not a statement of ambition. There is clearly no vision that there will ever be a need for increased capacity.

And this is precisely where you can be shown to be talking complete :censored:. Not bother to mess around? Of course they frigging well would – IF WE WERE IN A POSITION WHERE THERE WERE PEOPLE TO ACTUALLY COME AND SIT IN THE SEATS AND IT MADE FINANCIAL SENSE. They would not throw away money because they couldn’t be bothered, just like they aren’t throwing money away now on seats for show. For someone who goes on all the time about how the club should be aiming for promotion, you are remarkably casual about wanting to drain the playing budget for the sake of the prestige of having 12,000 empty seats each week – or have you found a way to spend the same pound twice?

[Corporal_Jones]

Clearly there is much still to be done. The plans for the stadium need to be drawn up to start with and I understand that they will include for allowing for an expansion to 20,000 if required at some point in the future, unlike the redeveloped BP plans which would have been exceptionally hard to expand to 20K after the surrounding land was re-developed.

 

 

 

 

I'll try to explain it again. Clubs with ambition build new stadiums with capacities reflecting where they want to be. Think Bolton, Wigan, Hull etc etc, none of whom came anywhere near to filling their new grounds to begin with (and none do now on a game-by-game basis. Even City don't at present.) On the oher hand, clubs without ideas above their station build little stadiums and talk vaguely of expanding sometime never (usually when the present directors have passed on the baton.)

 

The clubs with big stadiums and big ideas usually advance, sometimes dramatically. Those with limited visions and an 'ah well, we're a little, inferior club' attitude usually stay where they are.

[LaticsPete]

Why are we assuming that the new stadium will be nearly full all the time? It's a stadium for a third or fourth division club, and few of these fill their grounds whether new or not.

 

Cake. Eating it.

You say that 12000 lacks ambition - you slate the proposal.

You say that it is unlikely to be full - you slate the proposal.

 

Consider this. It is wholly unrealistic to get the funding in place to build a 20000 or more capacity ground in the next few years. We either do nothing or we achieve something realistic. Get there, with the built in capability to extend further, and look again.

 

BTW, what would you see as a ground capacity that said to you that the ambition was more than third or fourth division? Quantify it.

[Corporal_Jones]

It's a very good point. Some people are raising issues, perfectly valid ones, and getting shot down straight away. We only have one shot at this and it needs to be right. Once the stadium is built that it, its final. It's not like signing a player. We can't just go and get another if this one doesn't work.

 

Personally, I think 12,000 would be too small. Showing a lack of ambition. 15,000 would be about right, with the potential to upgrade to 20,000. You have got to show potential investors and future players that we are an attractive proposition, and that we do have some ambition. I think 12,000 says that we are a league 1 club with league 1 ambitions.

 

 

 

I did say that the club's stature in the game was shrinking week by week. This plan only underlines the fact.

 

 

[Corporal_Jones]

Cake. Eating it.

You say that 12000 lacks ambition - you slate the proposal.

You say that it is unlikely to be full - you slate the proposal.

 

Consider this. It is wholly unrealistic to get the funding in place to build a 20000 or more capacity ground in the next few years. We either do nothing or we achieve something realistic. Get there, with the built in capability to extend further, and look again.

 

BTW, what would you see as a ground capacity that said to you that the ambition was more than third or fourth division? Quantify it.

 

 

 

 

It's unlikely to be full because the ambition isn't to fill it. 'Realism', in this case, is lower division football. Forever. Instead of going out of business. Cheered on by a shrinking hardcore fanbase who think that this is ambition and progress.

 

 

[LaticsPete]

It's unlikely to be full because the ambition isn't to fill it. 'Realism', in this case, is lower division football. Forever. Instead of going out of business. Cheered on by a shrinking hardcore fanbase who think that this is ambition and progress.

 

Will you answer my question?

[Corporal_Jones]

Totally agree... but its great to get HDGS's opinion as it is always founded on the knowlege he really understands the logstics of ticketing and costs....

 

 

 

 

Other clubs in towns essentially no different than Oldham also have to deal with the logistics of ticketing and costs. They manage to build stadiums that people will take seriously.

[BlueArmy1989]

I'll try to explain it again. Clubs with ambition build new stadiums with capacities reflecting where they want to be. Think Bolton, Wigan, Hull etc etc, none of whom came anywhere near to filling their new grounds to begin with (and none do now on a game-by-game basis. Even City don't at present.) On the oher hand, clubs without ideas above their station build little stadiums and talk vaguely of expanding sometime never (usually when the present directors have passed on the baton.)

 

The clubs with big stadiums and big ideas usually advance, sometimes dramatically. Those with limited visions and an 'ah well, we're a little, inferior club' attitude usually stay where they are.

 

BOLLOCKS whats to say we will go up in then next 5 or 10 years ?? why build a 20k stadium that will cost 30 million for example and then we only get 6 thousand (if were lucky) in league 1 and then 8-10k in championship it doesnt make sense !! if we get promoted we will leave it for 1 season or 2 to see if we stay up or go back down if we get a good foothold in championship it will be extended it jut doesnt mke sense to build a 20k stadium and have 5 thousand people there no matter how u look at it

[Prendy_1984]

The aim of TTA has always been to turn OAFC into a self sustaining club. Building a bigger stadium would obviously be more expensive. If with a 12000 seater stadium we can be self sufficient then I am happy. It does not show a lack of ambition, it shows common sense which is what the TTA have always aimed for. And following times of uncertainty is what we should all be wanting I would've thought

[Corporal_Jones]

Will you answer my question?

 

 

 

 

After all I've said, is it really necessary to spell it out?

 

The way I see it, if Wigan, Bolton and Preston etc etc can have stadiums with 20,000-plus capacities, I don't see why we can't. Even the likes of Doncaster-a non-league club only a few years ago, and perennial minnows before that-have a bigger capacity. Why are we inferior and have to settle for less all the time?

 

However, the 16,000 projected for the BP redevelopment would have been more suitable than 12,000 for a club that still pretended to have ambitions to play at a higher level. Even SP 2000 was to be 15,000. How big was Ferney supposed to be-I forget?

Edited July 22, 2009 by Corporal_Jones

[doggy_oafc]

I'm more of a 'reader' on this board than a 'poster' but I have to vent my feelings on this one:

 

This proposed complex will consist not only of a football ground but of other facilities which once operative will (hopefully) generate the much talked of 'revenue streams' which will eventually make OAFC self-sufficient. In short this is a long-term project designed to stabilise the club's foreseeable future. If you want a short-term project that will leave with us with an Emirates-style stadium, just pop along and go and get us a multi-millionnaire sugar daddy who'll pay for it all. Good luck with that.

 

The fact is this proposal reflects the resources at the club's disposal, which as we all know, are modest. This in mind there is absolutely no point in building some giant stadium we can fill to about a quarter capacity and leaving us with the potentially crippling problem of maintaining a vastly under-populated stadium at the expense of a competitive playing side. Darlington?

 

Though ordinary to look at Colchester's and Shrewsbury's respective grounds are quite remarkable in that with capacities of a mere 10,000, they can be expanded to hold around 40,000.

 

Let's get this site built and let's get OAFC paying its own bills and suddenly, when TTA decide it's time to go, Oldham Athletic become an attractive asset to a potential buyer. And, when at this time we are (hopefully, again) heading in the right direction on the pitch and the crowds are starting to burgeon guess what, we fill in the corners and then guess what, we start adding tiers. This will not be a huge undertaking for a successful and self-sufficient club.

 

To those of you who prefer to mope in darkened rooms pattering Sylvia Plath-esque sentiments about the club on your computers, it is your refusal to find the positive in anything that would sound the death knell for this team we all, bizzarely, love so much. Not the council, not TTA, not the players, you. You would truly be astonished the impact collective enthusiasm and ambition can have. Give it a go.

 

This is an exciting venture and could form the foundations on which OAFC could become a force once more.

 

PS. FAO TTA, please don't be disheartened by some of the spoilt, misery junkies on here. They DO NOT speak for all of us, good luck with the venture I for one am 100% behind you.

 

That is all.

 

Woof.

[BlueArmy1989]

I'm more of a 'reader' on this board than a 'poster' but I have to vent my feelings on this one:

 

This proposed complex will consist not only of a football ground but of other facilities which once operative will (hopefully) generate the much talked of 'revenue streams' which will eventually make OAFC self-sufficient. In short this is a long-term project designed to stabilise the club's foreseeable future. If you want a short-term project that will leave with us with an Emirates-style stadium, just pop along and go and get us a multi-millionnaire sugar daddy who'll pay for it all. Good luck with that.

 

The fact is this proposal reflects the resources at the club's disposal, which as we all know, are modest. This in mind there is absolutely no point in building some giant stadium we can fill to about a quarter capacity and leaving us with the potentially crippling problem of maintaining a vastly under-populated stadium at the expense of a competitive playing side. Darlington?

 

Though ordinary to look at Colchester's and Shrewsbury's respective grounds are quite remarkable in that with capacities of a mere 10,000, they can be expanded to hold around 40,000.

 

Let's get this site built and let's get OAFC paying its own bills and suddenly, when TTA decide it's time to go, Oldham Athletic become an attractive asset to a potential buyer. And, when at this time we are (hopefully, again) heading in the right direction on the pitch and the crowds are starting to burgeon guess what, we fill in the corners and then guess what, we start adding tiers. This will not be a huge undertaking for a successful and self-sufficient club.

 

To those of you who prefer to mope in darkened rooms pattering Sylvia Plath-esque sentiments about the club on your computers, it is your refusal to find the positive in anything that would sound the death knell for this team we all, bizzarely, love so much. Not the council, not TTA, not the players, you. You would truly be astonished the impact collective enthusiasm and ambition can have. Give it a go.

 

This is an exciting venture and could form the foundations on which OAFC could become a force once more.

 

PS. FAO TTA, please don't be disheartened by some of the spoilt, misery junkies on here. They DO NOT speak for all of us, good luck with the venture I for one am 100% behind you.

 

That is all.

 

Woof.

 

AGREED 100%

[Prendy_1984]

I'm more of a 'reader' on this board than a 'poster' but I have to vent my feelings on this one:

 

This proposed complex will consist not only of a football ground but of other facilities which once operative will (hopefully) generate the much talked of 'revenue streams' which will eventually make OAFC self-sufficient. In short this is a long-term project designed to stabilise the club's foreseeable future. If you want a short-term project that will leave with us with an Emirates-style stadium, just pop along and go and get us a multi-millionnaire sugar daddy who'll pay for it all. Good luck with that.

 

The fact is this proposal reflects the resources at the club's disposal, which as we all know, are modest. This in mind there is absolutely no point in building some giant stadium we can fill to about a quarter capacity and leaving us with the potentially crippling problem of maintaining a vastly under-populated stadium at the expense of a competitive playing side. Darlington?

 

Though ordinary to look at Colchester's and Shrewsbury's respective grounds are quite remarkable in that with capacities of a mere 10,000, they can be expanded to hold around 40,000.

 

Let's get this site built and let's get OAFC paying its own bills and suddenly, when TTA decide it's time to go, Oldham Athletic become an attractive asset to a potential buyer. And, when at this time we are (hopefully, again) heading in the right direction on the pitch and the crowds are starting to burgeon guess what, we fill in the corners and then guess what, we start adding tiers. This will not be a huge undertaking for a successful and self-sufficient club.

 

To those of you who prefer to mope in darkened rooms pattering Sylvia Plath-esque sentiments about the club on your computers, it is your refusal to find the positive in anything that would sound the death knell for this team we all, bizzarely, love so much. Not the council, not TTA, not the players, you. You would truly be astonished the impact collective enthusiasm and ambition can have. Give it a go.

 

This is an exciting venture and could form the foundations on which OAFC could become a force once more.

 

PS. FAO TTA, please don't be disheartened by some of the spoilt, misery junkies on here. They DO NOT speak for all of us, good luck with the venture I for one am 100% behind you.

 

That is all.

 

Woof.

 

Good post

 

Woof woof

[LaticsPete]

[quote name=Corporal_Jones' date='Jul 22 2009, 11:57 AM' post='284515]

After all I've said, is it really necessary to spell it out?

 

For once a straight answer would be good. But it's easier for you to criticise than articulate what precisely you would regard as demonstrating ambition.

 

P.S> good post Doggy

Edited July 22, 2009 by LaticsPete

[Corporal_Jones]

This proposed complex will consist not only of a football ground but of other facilities which once operative will (hopefully) generate the much talked of 'revenue streams' which will eventually make OAFC self-sufficient. In short this is a long-term project designed to stabilise the club's foreseeable future. If you want a short-term project that will leave with us with an Emirates-style stadium, just pop along and go and get us a multi-millionnaire sugar daddy who'll pay for it all. Good luck with that.

 

 

 

 

People are not comparing it to the Emirates, but to the proposed 16,000-seat redevelopment of BP, from which this represents a serious retreat. And also to the 15,000 capacity SP 2000 fiasco. Nor is anybody talking about sugar daddies. Some have, however, mentioned the vision that TTA said they had for the club when they took over.

Edited July 22, 2009 by Corporal_Jones

[Harry Dowds Green Shirt]

I'll try to explain it again. Clubs with ambition build new stadiums with capacities reflecting where they want to be. Think Bolton, Wigan, Hull etc etc, none of whom came anywhere near to filling their new grounds to begin with (and none do now on a game-by-game basis. Even City don't at present.) On the oher hand, clubs without ideas above their station build little stadiums and talk vaguely of expanding sometime never (usually when the present directors have passed on the baton.)

 

The clubs with big stadiums and big ideas usually advance, sometimes dramatically. Those with limited visions and an 'ah well, we're a little, inferior club' attitude usually stay where they are.

 

Ok corp.

 

Now you and me share a number of the same general concerns. However, my view tends to be, shall we say, a little more optimistic than yours

 

So let me explain my point again just for you. Or in fact just answer this question. To take the proposed new stadium from a 12,000 seat arena to a 20,000 seat arena, will cost around an extra £8 million. Where will that £8 million pounds come from? When you can answer that, we can debate the point some more.

 

I would at this stage rather have a 12,000 seat stadium, that can be expanded in the future, with facilities that are producing additional income streams thus making us self sufficient for £20million, than a stadium that holds 20,000 for the same £20 million pounds but doesn't produce the additional income streams so that we are reliant on either a sugar daddy type owner (i.e C.M. or TTA) or we have to cut budgets or make losses that ultimately takes us back to where we were in 2003.

 

Cheers,

 

 

 

Harry

[Corporal_Jones]

[quote name=Corporal_Jones' date='Jul 22 2009, 11:57 AM' post='284515]

After all I've said, is it really necessary to spell it out?

 

For once a straight answer would be good. But it's easier for you to criticise than articulate what precisely you would regard as demonstrating ambition.

 

P.S> good post Doggy

 

 

 

Are you having pedantic pie for lunch again?

[Markoasis]

Ok corp.

 

Now you and me share a number of the same general concerns. However, my view tends to be, shall we say, a little more optimistic than yours

 

So let me explain my point again just for you. Or in fact just answer this question. To take the proposed new stadium from a 12,000 seat arena to a 20,000 seat arena, will cost around an extra £8 million. Where will that £8 million pounds come from? When you can answer that, we can debate the point some more.

 

I would at this stage rather have a 12,000 seat stadium, that can be expanded in the future, with facilities that are producing additional income streams thus making us self sufficient for £20million, than a stadium that holds 20,000 for the same £20 million pounds but doesn't produce the additional income streams so that we are reliant on either a sugar daddy type owner (i.e C.M. or TTA) or we have to cut budgets or make losses that ultimately takes us back to where we were in 2003.

 

Cheers,

 

 

 

Harry

 

 

ditto, whilst traveling around the 92 grounds we all agreed that a new stadium as to have other streams of revenue. Loads had functions on whilst we were there, which brings in year round ££££, loads more had pitches being hired out again bringing in all year round money.

 

12K is realise for our needs at present and will allow for expansion at any point that it is required.

 

But what ever happens in the life of Latics corp will always be on a downer about it .... that's life!!!

[LaticsPete]

Are you having pedantic pie for lunch again?

 

 

And maybe you will answer Harry's question as well?

[Guest sheridans_world]

I'm more of a 'reader' ..... Woof.

 

Excellent well balanced post, sums the situation up almost perfectly.

 

 

Ok corp.

 

...

 

Cheers,

 

 

 

Harry

Agree 100%, why build a larger stadium when it wont be filled? As you quite rightly point out, why build something to big and end up with a Darlington situation, a large stadium with little or not atmosphere because well under 50% of the ground has people in. If you took a 12000 seater stadium, latics would just about fill 50% of it on a normal match day.

[Guest sheridans_world]

Are you having pedantic pie for lunch again?

Answer the question.

 

 

What would you want to see?

[Matt]

Somebody on the internet is wrong...