New Ground - Questions Only

[Latics and England]

We've already got a thread for people's opinions on the new ground but I thought it would be useful to have one dedicated to questions that hopefully Simon, Alan or Barry might see fit to answer.

 

Please don't use this for your views, use the other one. If the mods don't think this is appropriate, feel free to merge into the other thread.

 

I'll start with three questions

 

1) Please can the club clarify whether there is currently an intention to move directly from Boundary Park to the new ground, or whether they envisage a period of ground-sharing between leaving BP and the new ground opening.

 

2) I appreciate that the detailed plans have not yet been drawn up but will we be asking the architect to design something that could easily be developed to increase capacity or will the capacity effectively be fixed?

 

3) Has (or will) the club look into the legality and feasability of incorporating an area of safe standing within the new stadium?

 

 

[oafc1955]

Are there any other potential sites available in the borough or is it Failsworth or nothing?

[Alec1954]

Are Oldham Rugby joining the tea party?

[LaticNik]

Going off these questions are we assuming that TTA are thick?

 

E4e

FFSKE

[Stitch_KTF]

Without any other figures to work with......

 

Considering the BP development was put at £80M, and this development is at £20M (with the council contibuting), are TTA set to make a massive profit?

[razza699]

Going off these questions are we assuming that TTA are thick?

 

E4e

FFSKE

 

 

[singe]

What are the other reveneue streams from this development.

 

Are any 3rd parties in Confidentiallity Agreement stage for revenue streams and developing BP?

 

 

 

 

Stich, most of the £80m was mainly due to be spent on the Hotel, retail dvelopment and 80 flats. Pretty sure £16m of that was for the Stadium.

 

[MaskedOwl]

Do you, TTA, think that some latics fans will never fully appreciate what you have done and are doing for the club?

[LeylandLatic]

2) I appreciate that the detailed plans have not yet been drawn up but will we be asking the architect to design something that could easily be developed to increase capacity or will the capacity effectively be fixed?

 

With regards to building design and architecture, it's fairly common practice for contractors to reuse plans from previously successful projects to minimise costs in the design and planning phases of the construction. This is why you see so many stadiums around the UK that look very similar with only subtle astethic differences and in large the same structural design. I'm a little afraid we are going to end up with a stadium that looks exactly like both Colchester and Shrewbury's. From what I've heard they have not been built with the view to expansion in mind. I personally think we should just take the plunge on a 15k seater stadium.

 

[Senor_Coconut]

With regards to building design and architecture, it's fairly common practice for contractors to reuse plans from previously successful projects to minimise costs in the design and planning phases of the construction. This is why you see so many stadiums around the UK that look very similar with only subtle astethic differences and in large the same structural design. I'm a little afraid we are going to end up with a stadium that looks exactly like both Colchester and Shrewbury's. From what I've heard they have not been built with the view to expansion in mind. I personally think we should just take the plunge on a 15k seater stadium.

 

 

 

According to the modern day oracle, Wiki, both can be upgraded if required.

[Stitch_KTF]

Stich, most of the £80m was mainly due to be spent on the Hotel, retail dvelopment and 80 flats. Pretty sure £16m of that was for the Stadium.

 

Still, a large percentage of that money must still be somewhere. Wasn't it all to be self-funded? Some of it can be accounted for through land values dropping....but £60M? Not to mention the extra from where the re-developed BP would have stood....as well as the proposed contribution from the council.

 

 

I feel TTA are planning to build the cheapest stadium possible (in order to keep their promise) whilst making a massive profit. Future limitations as a result of a small capacity (and a lack of the much fabled 24/7 income) wont be of concern to them as, by their own admission, they wont be around much longer.

 

Of course until the plans come out nobody can make much of an assessment, but regular readers of the board will probably know I'm hardly a cynic.

[doggy_oafc]

With regards to building design and architecture, it's fairly common practice for contractors to reuse plans from previously successful projects to minimise costs in the design and planning phases of the construction. This is why you see so many stadiums around the UK that look very similar with only subtle astethic differences and in large the same structural design. I'm a little afraid we are going to end up with a stadium that looks exactly like both Colchester and Shrewbury's. From what I've heard they have not been built with the view to expansion in mind. I personally think we should just take the plunge on a 15k seater stadium.

 

You're wrong. Remarkably both grounds can be expanded to a capacity of around 40,000 if required.

 

Woof.

[LeylandLatic]

According to the modern day oracle, Wiki, both can be upgraded if required.

 

 

I stand corrected, I assume we're looking at pretty much the exact plans on which they were built then. A little disappointing, but glad we are moving forward again.

[oafc0000]

The original plan for Oldham Arena included plans for a Hotel, Gym and Conference facilities. It was said that these where essential to give the club revenue 24/7 365 days a year. What corporate/commercial opportunities exist / are planned for the this new site.

[davebuckley06]

Still, a large percentage of that money must still be somewhere. Wasn't it all to be self-funded? Some of it can be accounted for through land values dropping....but £60M? Not to mention the extra from where the re-developed BP would have stood....as well as the proposed contribution from the council.

 

 

I feel TTA are planning to build the cheapest stadium possible (in order to keep their promise) whilst making a massive profit. Future limitations as a result of a small capacity (and a lack of the much fabled 24/7 income) wont be of concern to them as, by their own admission, they wont be around much longer.

 

Of course until the plans come out nobody can make much of an assessment, but regular readers of the board will probably know I'm hardly a cynic.

 

might av missed it but when did they admit they wont be around much longer?

[jimsleftfoot]

Still, a large percentage of that money must still be somewhere. Wasn't it all to be self-funded? Some of it can be accounted for through land values dropping....but £60M? Not to mention the extra from where the re-developed BP would have stood....as well as the proposed contribution from the council.

 

 

I feel TTA are planning to build the cheapest stadium possible (in order to keep their promise) whilst making a massive profit. Future limitations as a result of a small capacity (and a lack of the much fabled 24/7 income) wont be of concern to them as, by their own admission, they wont be around much longer.

 

Of course until the plans come out nobody can make much of an assessment, but regular readers of the board will probably know I'm hardly a cynic.

 

TTA Quote re. initial development:

 

He conceded that the club had to be aware of “considerable funding issues in delivering the vision”, adding: “To this end we have incorporated plans for housing, allowing some land to be sold to fund the initial part of the development.

 

“I hope that this is not necessary and we receive enough support, especially from public bodies to underpin the funding.

 

“At the present time we have no indications of financial support so we have to be mindful of means of starting the scheme that will ultimately cost between £70 and £80 million.”

 

This doesn’t actually mean we spend £70-80 million. The original plan was that the whole project would cost that figure. However, TTA’s plans were to only get planning permission on the land for the stadium and various housing/recreational/conferencing developments. The land for the housing etc would be sold on to a developer with planning permission for a nominal fee (e.g. £30 m) greater than what the land would be worth without it (e.g. £12.m). This money received would then be used to build the stadium. The developer would then bear the cost of building the houses and other bits which say could have been another £50 which takes you up to the total of £80m. This £50m would have nothing to do with Latics or TTA whatsoever.

 

However, due to plummeting land costs, the amount of money TTA would have been able to raise from selling the land to a developer were severly reduced and the project was scaled back, if my mind serves me rightly. This would still affect the amount of money that could be raised now.

 

So if your asking will BP make millions in profit, well who knows, but certainly not £50m.

 

[OAFC_Rob]

What I'm more concearned about is this comment "Upon completion, the club would then sign a long-term lease with the local authority."

 

Does this mean that OLDHAM COUNCIL OWN the actual new ground and not us?? Therefore we would be actually renting a stadium and not own one anymore

[Stitch_KTF]

That's all good and well, and I understand with regards to the housing (so that explains a chunk of the £60M - a little short-sighted on my part!), but....

 

"However, TTA’s plans were to only get planning permission on the land for the stadium and various housing/recreational/conferencing developments. The land for the housing etc would be sold on to a developer with planning permission for a nominal fee "

 

 

I always imagined that if Latics hoped to enjoy the revenue from the hotel/recreational/conferencing developments then they would be expected to build them themselves.

 

I stand by the jist of my concern, even though I've clearly over-egged the sums involved in my previous post.

Edited July 22, 2009 by Stitch_KTF

[LT_SMASH]

1, Do you realise that the company car insurance will go up when you relocate to Failsworth?

 

2, Do you think the move to Failsworth is going to help the clubs much debated drinking culture?

 

[Oafc88]

Are there any other potential sites available in the borough or is it Failsworth or nothing?

 

Agree with this question, dont care about the size of stadium or moving away from BP, its where we are moving to that really gets me!

[davebuckley06]

What I'm more concearned about is this comment "Upon completion, the club would then sign a long-term lease with the local authority."

 

Does this mean that OLDHAM COUNCIL OWN the actual new ground and not us?? Therefore we would be actually renting a stadium and not own one anymore

 

the allotment land will still be the councils so we will have to lease that but the main part the club are buying off british areospace so we will own the majority of the site

[ritchie82]

Why Failsworth? You cannot pick a worst location for the majority of fans within the OMBC area. You'd be better off in Rochdale.

[Diego_Sideburns]

I have no problem with a questions being put on here or sent to the club. I think it would be a good way to start the forum off. I would imagine that there are 5 or 6 worries which we all share.

 

• What facilities will be built to bring in extra revenue into the club
• is this extra income expected to be enough to see the club become self safficent
• If not what sort of monthly ? Yearly ? short fall are we looking at
• How much of the profits (from the external facilities) will go to the Council / TTA and not direct into the clubs accounts.
• What is rational from reducing the capacity down to 12,000 from the original 16,000 proposed for the Oldham Arena
• Will the new stadium be easily / cheaply extendable ?
• What sort of cost would an extension of 4,000 seats cost compared to just building them outright
• Will all money generated from the sale of BP go towards to rebuilding of the new stadium or is some of it destined to repay "loans" / "contribution" provided by TTA / Banks

 

[garcon]

What I'm more concearned about is this comment "Upon completion, the club would then sign a long-term lease with the local authority."

 

Does this mean that OLDHAM COUNCIL OWN the actual new ground and not us?? Therefore we would be actually renting a stadium and not own one anymore

I initially picked up on that too. However, my understanding now is that the long-term lease agreement is for the LAND (or more specifically the proportion of the land owned by Oldham Council), rather than the stadium. i.e. it's effectively the same as buying a house LEASEHOLD (where you pay ground rent to the owner of the land) as opposed to FREEHOLD (where the land is part of the purchase).

 

At least I think that's the case. Would be nice to clarify.

 

My main other question has been asked by oafc0000 - the BP redevlopment included significant commercial income streams to help finance the club in the long term ... what element of this is included in the new proposal?

 

 

As for "do we think TTA are thick", I suppose it'd help if everyone started from the same position...

[al_bro]

I stand corrected, I assume we're looking at pretty much the exact plans on which they were built then. A little disappointing, but glad we are moving forward again.

I don't think it would be possible to extend to 40,000 on the Failsworth site. It's not big enough, considering the need for parking. It would never happen anyway. I think 25,000 would be the max we would need even in the Prem.