The big stadium capacity question.

[dish]

The thing what concerns me is that if we build a 12 thousand seater stadium, will that mean we will 12 thousand available seats for every game. Has segregation been taken into account?

 

It wouldn't surprise me if there is a reason why our capacity is reduced to even less.

[Corporal_Jones]

And.....your point is?

 

I simply asked if you could back your argument up, your argument to quote you directly that clubs who build small stadiums, the aim is stability at the lower level of professional football so I could take your argument a bit more seriously

 

You quite blatantly cant

 

Hence it can be treated as no more than subjective opinion.

 

My pedantry may have bored you, but it added plenty of substance to my arguments corp as I could back up what I was saying, and also proved many of your arguments wrong despite your best attempts to move the goalposts.

 

This is the last post of yours in which I will reply to as it is quite obvious your just arguing for arguments sake.

 

 

 

As I keep having to say, all the clubs with stadiums with capacities as low as 12000 tend to be concentrated at the bottom end of the Football League. How many of them ever seem like they realistically expect to be anywhere else?

[Corporal_Jones]

Fancy a wager?

 

 

 

If you want?

 

Are we talking time limits?

 

[singe]

If you want?

 

Are we talking time limits?

<creak> Goalposts moving..

[Corporal_Jones]

Notts County?

 

 

 

Notts County's ground holds over 21000. It is neither particuarly small nor a newly built stadium.

 

[Corporal_Jones]

<creak> Goalposts moving..

 

 

 

Don't be stupid. How can anybody ever be paid if the time limit is never?

[Corporal_Jones]

ANd i know before u chirp up, Notts County has 20k capacity but its still not exactly large compared with some of the grounds out there.......

 

 

 

Now this is what you call moving the goalposts.

 

[real]

As I keep having to say, all the clubs with stadiums with capacities as low as 12000 tend to be concentrated at the bottom end of the Football League. How many of them ever seem like they realistically expect to be anywhere else?

 

 

Bit of a loose point there - you can't use "all" and then "tend", either all of them are or it's not all.

 

Most of the clubs are in the "bottom" end - but then again is that Lge2 or Lge 1 &2?

 

There's a fair few in the Championship with less than 12k too.

 

But, what really makes me wonder about your point.....(and perhaps your intention to argue against anything regardless of self-contradiction)....

 

 

is that you have repeatedly claimied that year upon year post 2001 (or earlier) our gates have been dropping and dropping and dropping.

So surely building a stadium with over double the latest season's attendance is actually a huge sign of ambition. No?

Edited July 29, 2009 by real

[real]

Don't be stupid. How can anybody ever be paid if the time limit is never?

 

 

The other guy could be corp, but you couldn't.

[Lookers_Carl]

Bit of a loose point there - you can't use "all" and then "tend", either all of them are or it's not all.

 

Most of the clubs are in the "bottom" end - but then again is that Lge2 or Lge 1 &2?

 

There's a fair few in the Championship with less than 12k too.

 

But, what really makes me wonder about your point.....(and perhaps your intention to argue against anything regardless of self-contradiction)....

 

 

is that you have repeatedly claimied that year upon year post 2001 (or earlier) our gates have been dropping and dropping and dropping.

So surely building a stadium with over double the latest season's attendance is actually a huge sign of ambition. No?

 

Just to point out that are average attendance last season was 300 higher than season before

[Corporal_Jones]

The other guy could be corp, but you couldn't.

 

 

 

Exactly. Much as I'm reluctant to bet against success for the club I support, I'm confident enough in muy predictions regarding what's going on to take him up on it, if there was a way to do it.

[real]

Just to point out that are average attendance last season was 300 higher than season before

 

 

Really?

[real]

Exactly. Much as I'm reluctant to bet against success for the club I support, I'm confident enough in muy predictions regarding what's going on to take him up on it, if there was a way to do it.

 

If you're so confident, why not offer say 15/1 against us going up in the next 5 years?

 

I'll have £10 on that, for a £150 return if we do go up.

[singe]

Don't be stupid. How can anybody ever be paid if the time limit is never?

QUOTE (singe @ Jul 29 2009, 18:42 PM)

<creak> Goalposts moving

 

Who said anything about a time limit of never?

Nothing in my post indicated a time limit, that was you.

I just pointed out that you were already moving the goalposts.

 

[Yard Dog]

I may be doing TTA a massive injustice here, but feck it - these things need to be discussed - ..does anyone else worry that the reason TTA have decided upon a 12k stadium is because it will inevitably mean them having to put in less capital and hence get a bigger a return on their investment...and does anyone else fear they will be looking to realise this return pretty quickly after the stadium is ready ?

[Stitch_KTF]

I may be doing TTA a massive injustice here, but feck it - these things need to be discussed - ..does anyone else worry that the reason TTA have decided upon a 12k stadium is because it will inevitably mean them having to put in less capital and hence get a bigger a return on their investment...and does anyone else fear they will be looking to realise this return pretty quickly after the stadium is ready ?

 

I said as much the day this was revealed - Harry Dowd laughed at me and that was pretty much that.

 

To me it clearly doesn't stack up but then we're going to have to wait for the plans before really trying to suss it out.

 

At the end of the day I think it will prove that the BP land will have paid for a decade's losses, however we will be in a much better situation than when TTA arrived (albeit not a very exciting one). Disapointing but fair enough....?

 

Could Micah Richards leave City any time soon? £1.5M for a couple of thousand seats wouldn't go amiss.

Edited July 29, 2009 by Stitch_KTF

[martjs]

Corporal Jones has argued strongly that building a 12,000 capacity stadium is a downscaling of ambition and we should make a statement of intent to our rvials and build a 16,000 capacity at least.

Is he right, or do you believe that the current economic climate and the amount of funds the TTA are willing to invest means that a 12,000 seater is right.

 

Some posters are arguing that there is a silent majority that agree we are wrong to downscale our plans. I want to see if they are right.

 

Some that have argued downscaling is OK as long as we build an expandable stadium, so that is the 2nd option in case you sit in either camp.

 

Slightly modified, as my question did not come out right. Only 1 vote before I amended it though.

 

To clarify my point a little, the "silent majority" that I made a reference to in the thread that is now locked (why?) may never tread these boards (excuse the pun)... In other words, just because the majority of fans on OWTB feel that 12,000 is adequate (as long as it's 'expandable' etc. etc. ) doesn't necessarily mean that the majority of Latics fans agree. This, or any other football club, message board may not and probably does not truly represent a cross-section of the fans - especially the ones that attend matches.

 

So, for me, the results of this poll prove nothing more than what was already established in the above-mentioned 'circular' 21 page thread.

 

And since wagers are a hot topic at the moment, I'm willing to bet that a 12,000 seater stadium for Latics will never be expanded in my lifetime. And when I say expanded I mean the addition of several thousand seats.

 

Edit: And before anyone accuses me of siding with the "dark side", I hope I'm wrong about the stadium expansion because that would mean significant success for the team I love and have supported for over 30 years.

Edited July 30, 2009 by martjs

[OldhamSheridan]

And since wagers are a hot topic at the moment, I'm willing to bet that a 12,000 seater stadium for Latics will never be expanded in my lifetime. And when I say expanded I mean the addition of several thousand seats.

 

You're as bad as Corpse. How the hell are you going to collect that one?

 

 

NB. I agree with your points (on bias) to an extent. Obviously it gives an indication of the users, but the people voting may well have a bias towards certain things, when compared to the overall Oldham crowd. I'd suspect capacity isn't really a question that would have such a bias as I can see little to no reason as to why age or socioeconomic bias that you get in Internet users would effect opinion on this matter.

Edited July 30, 2009 by OldhamSheridan

[singe]

To clarify my point a little, the "silent majority" that I made a reference to in the thread that is now locked (why?) may never tread these boards (excuse the pun)... In other words, just because the majority of fans on OWTB feel that 12,000 is adequate (as long as it's 'expandable' etc. etc. ) doesn't necessarily mean that the majority of Latics fans agree. This, or any other football club, message board may not and probably does not truly represent a cross-section of the fans - especially the ones that attend matches.

 

So, for me, the results of this poll prove nothing more than what was already established in the above-mentioned 'circular' 21 page thread.

 

And since wagers are a hot topic at the moment, I'm willing to bet that a 12,000 seater stadium for Latics will never be expanded in my lifetime. And when I say expanded I mean the addition of several thousand seats.

 

Edit: And before anyone accuses me of siding with the "dark side", I hope I'm wrong about the stadium expansion because that would mean significant success for the team I love and have supported for over 30 years.

I apprecite your clarification mart.

I do understand where you are coming from.

However, there are internet users from 2-62 on here so I tihnk the poll gives a pretty good indication in general.

I freely admit that the numbers who are hung up on the 16,000 has suprised me, but mianly because I cannot understand why some people cannot graps the economics of it.

I do agree with marko's point, lets hope the TTA don;t do the bare minimum lego stand, that it is something to be proud of, but we'll see once the plans are drawn up.

Givn they are going to include the lsited building int he desing, I think they deserve a fair crack of the whip before castigating them.

 

[martjs]

You're as bad as Corpse. How the hell are you going to collect that one?

 

 

NB. I agree with your points (on bias) to an extent. Obviously it gives an indication of the users, but the people voting may well have a bias towards certain things, when compared to the overall Oldham crowd. I'd suspect capacity isn't really a question that would have such a bias as I can see little to no reason as to why age or socioeconomic bias that you get in Internet users would effect opinion on this matter.

 

Well I am one of his followers apparently.

 

And there's the thing about the bet - I can't possibly collect on it, can I? That's how confident I am that an expansion will never take place. The expansion is put there as a carrot in what is really a downsizing* of the ground redevelopment and future of OAFC. However, I repeat myself here*, I would love to be proved wrong.

 

* Note to self: you're beginning to sound like Him as well...

[singe]

I said as much the day this was revealed - Harry Dowd laughed at me and that was pretty much that.

 

To me it clearly doesn't stack up but then we're going to have to wait for the plans before really trying to suss it out.

 

At the end of the day I think it will prove that the BP land will have paid for a decade's losses, however we will be in a much better situation than when TTA arrived (albeit not a very exciting one). Disapointing but fair enough....?

 

Could Micah Richards leave City any time soon? £1.5M for a couple of thousand seats wouldn't go amiss.

QUOTE (Yard Dog @ Jul 29 2009, 22:36 PM)

I may be doing TTA a massive injustice here, but feck it - these things need to be discussed - ..does anyone else worry that the reason TTA have decided upon a 12k stadium is because it will inevitably mean them having to put in less capital and hence get a bigger a return on their investment...and does anyone else fear they will be looking to realise this return pretty quickly after the stadium is ready ?

 

I said as much the day this was revealed - Harry Dowd laughed at me and that was pretty much that.

 

To me it clearly doesn't stack up but then we're going to have to wait for the plans before really trying to suss it out.

 

At the end of the day I think it will prove that the BP land will have paid for a decade's losses, however we will be in a much better situation than when TTA arrived (albeit not a very exciting one). Disapointing but fair enough....?

 

Could Micah Richards leave City any time soon? £1.5M for a couple of thousand seats wouldn't go amiss.

Obvisouyl discussing the TTA money should not be swept under the carpet, but yes, Yard Do, I do think that you are doing the TTA a gross injustice.

Of course they are putting less money in. But it would have been debt. Which was the norm in the BCC era (before Credit Crunch). So they will put less money in. But that will not neccesdarily mean a better return on there investment.

I think some people think that when the TTA walk, they will have a bank acount builging with £10's of millions.

The simple maths dictates this.

Money in

£8m stadium

£2m funding losses by the time it is built (and the people who would have dont that can be counted on one finger)

£20m New stadium

£30m

 

Land sold for ?

We do not know, but is it going to be lots more than £30million?

I doubt it

 

But overall, I agree with Stich that we will be in a far better position

And overall I think it likely once the stadium is up and running then it will be Adios Amigos, thanks for the ride.

Lets hope it is a Championship leaving party.

 

[martjs]

I apprecite your clarification mart.

I do understand where you are coming from.

However, there are internet users from 2-62 on here so I tihnk the poll gives a pretty good indication in general.

I freely admit that the numbers who are hung up on the 16,000 has suprised me, but mianly because I cannot understand why some people cannot graps the economics of it.

I do agree with marko's point, lets hope the TTA don;t do the bare minimum lego stand, that it is something to be proud of, but we'll see once the plans are drawn up.

Givn they are going to include the lsited building int he desing, I think they deserve a fair crack of the whip before castigating them.

 

Thanks and you're welcome singe. I admit I have no idea about the economics of it but I just wonder if the 12,000 number is set in stone? As someone else as suggested, it would be interesting to see how the numbers (financial) compare for a 12K v. 16K stadium. Or is the stadium limited to 12,000 due to land available etc.?

 

On the poll and its value, I'm less concerned about it being a sample of a representative socioeconomic group I just don't want anyone in a position of responsibility thinking "well, we have the majority of fans on our side". Some people may think that's a ridiculous thing to say but look what happened to Ronnie Moore...

 

And I don't think I can be accused of castigating TTA. I appreciate them as much as the next fan - in fact, a few years ago in the Litten Tree I treated Simon Corney to a drunken "We love you guys. You don't realise what you've done for the club and us fans." No wonder he didn't return my email about meeting up for a pint over here...

 

[Zorrro]

Well I am one of his followers apparently.

 

And there's the thing about the bet - I can't possibly collect on it, can I? That's how confident I am that an expansion will never take place. The expansion is put there as a carrot in what is really a downsizing* of the ground redevelopment and future of OAFC. However, I repeat myself here*, I would love to be proved wrong.

 

* Note to self: you're beginning to sound like Him as well...

 

Heretic! We'll have less of that pessimism on here, m'laddo.

[Zorrro]

If the stadium was built for 12,000 but clearly included expansion plans to at least 16,000, would you be happy.

 

These 'expansion plans'. What do they entail?

 

(I know it's hypothetical, but humour me.)

[Corporal_Jones]

I apprecite your clarification mart.

I do understand where you are coming from.

However, there are internet users from 2-62 on here so I tihnk the poll gives a pretty good indication in general.

I freely admit that the numbers who are hung up on the 16,000 has suprised me, but mianly because I cannot understand why some people cannot graps the economics of it.

I do agree with marko's point, lets hope the TTA don;t do the bare minimum lego stand, that it is something to be proud of, but we'll see once the plans are drawn up.

Givn they are going to include the lsited building int he desing, I think they deserve a fair crack of the whip before castigating them.

 

 

 

People do grasp the economics of it, but are unwilling to settle for the fob off of a little lower division stadium and a future as a little lower division club. It's up to those who own the club to find the means to keep the club competitive.

 

As far how large or small the majority for this or that is, all you need to remember is that being in a majority doesn't necessarily (or even usually) make you correct about something.