Senor_Coconut Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 To be frank other than Alan Hardy saying they will look at making it unique and will look at other stadiums the only other indication was that is would be a similar type of build as Colchester... The thing is Pete... we know so little about the "real" plans that we are all a little worried.. I dont have a "agenda" I just have questions and worries... The other thread suggests otherwise Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 The other thread suggests otherwise Maybe I am getting confused but didn't the tta say we would aim to do a simila approach as. (insert two clubs). Weren't one of them Colchester? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaticsPete Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 Maybe I am getting confused but didn't the tta say we would aim to do a simila approach as. (insert two clubs). Weren't one of them Colchester? FFS - yes a "Similar approach" I.E. in terms of community facilities etc - not design!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 (edited) FFS - yes a "Similar approach" I.E. in terms of community facilities etc - not design!!! Tell me if I was wrong but they never said "not design" ? We simply do not know...hence the worry and confusion... I said above Alan Hardy said they would "look" at doing something unique... That is not a lot to go on... Edited September 25, 2009 by oafc0000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve_R Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 Just to put all this capacity talk into perspective, Brighton, who can't fill their 8,000 capacity ground are moving to a new stadium that will hold 20,000, and tomorrow's opponents Southend, who average around 7,500, having been given planning permission to build a new stadium with a 22,000 capacity. I'm sure their more sensible fans will be up in arms at them wasting all that money on a load of empty seats. Or will they see it as a sign that their club obviously wants to go places? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 The bigger the ground, more attractive the asset is for potential buyers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 The bigger the ground, more attractive the asset is for potential buyers. Very true... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnny punkster Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 The bigger the ground, more attractive the asset is for potential buyers. the better the product on the pitch, the more bums on seats. more seats required for those more bums on seats. baby steps-get the product right on the pitch first,then worry about not enough seats. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnny punkster Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 oh...i believe there is a contingency plan to be able to up the capacity if required, on the original stadium plans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NIKI1234 Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 Just to put all this capacity talk into perspective, Brighton, who can't fill their 8,000 capacity ground are moving to a new stadium that will hold 20,000, and tomorrow's opponents Southend, who average around 7,500, having been given planning permission to build a new stadium with a 22,000 capacity. I'm sure their more sensible fans will be up in arms at them wasting all that money on a load of empty seats. Or will they see it as a sign that their club obviously wants to go places? But were do the extra millions come from to build a larger capacity??? Coventry have a 30k stadium and get crowds of 16k. they need 24K to brake even and pay off the debts. They are currently in dire financial trouble because of building to big... There are othes that this has happened too.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
creepy Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 to refresh the memory, i cant find the official statement anywhere with regards to the Colchester/Shrewsbury design This mentions Conference facilities etc, a self sifficient club working off these facitities screams league 2 im afraid http://www.oldham-chronicle.co.uk/news-fea.../broadway-stand Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 (edited) Just to put all this capacity talk into perspective, Brighton, who can't fill their 8,000 capacity ground are moving to a new stadium that will hold 20,000, and tomorrow's opponents Southend, who average around 7,500, having been given planning permission to build a new stadium with a 22,000 capacity. I'm sure their more sensible fans will be up in arms at them wasting all that money on a load of empty seats. Or will they see it as a sign that their club obviously wants to go places? According to the thinking of many on here, Brighton and Southend should limit themselves to no more than about 13500. Incidentally, it shows just how Latics have declined when an historically smaller club like Southend can average 7500, when, in the same division, we are currently getting around 4200. It just shows how modest the 16000 BP proposal was when you consider that Southend are planning 22000, yet to hear some people talk, wanting a 16000 capacity is akin to demand that the club builds something like the Emirates. Lickle Oldham, lickle mentalities. Edited September 25, 2009 by Corporal_Jones Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 But were do the extra millions come from to build a larger capacity??? Coventry have a 30k stadium and get crowds of 16k. they need 24K to brake even and pay off the debts. They are currently in dire financial trouble because of building to big... There are othes that this has happened too.... What is happening at other clubs, who are operating in different circumstances, provides no evidence that sticking to the 16000 capacity that was in the BP proposal would break the club. It hasn't been stuck to because, since the BP redevelopment plan was drawn up, the club has decided to opt for attempted stability as a lower division club. Another Rochdale or Bury. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy_b_100 Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 a·gen·da [ə jéndə] noun (plural a·gen·das) 1. list of things to do: a formal list of things to be done in a specific order, especially a list of things to be discussed at a meeting 2. matters needing attention: the various matters that somebody needs to deal with at a specific time * What's your agenda for today? 3. personal motivation: an underlying personal viewpoint or bias Whadda you know I looked it up and lo and behold the bit in bold just about sums up the agenda that a few have. Irrispective of what has been officially said and released by the club we are treated to any 'read in between the lines' information that suits thier particular biased. The prosecution rests my lord. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 a·gen·da [ə jéndə] noun (plural a·gen·das) 1. list of things to do: a formal list of things to be done in a specific order, especially a list of things to be discussed at a meeting 2. matters needing attention: the various matters that somebody needs to deal with at a specific time * What's your agenda for today? 3. personal motivation: an underlying personal viewpoint or bias Whadda you know I looked it up and lo and behold the bit in bold just about sums up the agenda that a few have. Irrispective of what has been officially said and released by the club we are treated to any 'read in between the lines' information that suits thier particular biased. The prosecution rests my lord. And the Nodding Dogs don't have an underlying viewpoint or bias? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaticsPete Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 (edited) And the Nodding Dogs don't have an underlying viewpoint or bias? They may well have ....but andy's point, and mine earlier, was that so do some of those who are Shaking Head Dogs. Edited September 25, 2009 by LaticsPete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc1955 Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 the better the product on the pitch, the more bums on seats. more seats required for those more bums on seats. baby steps-get the product right on the pitch first,then worry about not enough seats. the better the product on the pitch, the more bums on seats. That is the single most important factor and the area of the business where TTA have hopelessly failed........The 5 year plan of Championship football hasn't happened and for that reason alone we are now scaling down our development plan to a 12,000 seater stadium in an area what will probably provide the cheapest option. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy_b_100 Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 (edited) And the Nodding Dogs don't have an underlying viewpoint or bias? I didnt select a target as has been pointed out, reading between the lines is not just the doom and gloomers perogative, however it does seem to be them that are using information not released by the club as brickbat to point out the flaws in anything that they have released officially. Edited September 25, 2009 by andy_b_100 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 LaticsPete... I am interested in you replying to my post... Am I right or wrong ? Lets clear it up... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NIKI1234 Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 What is happening at other clubs, who are operating in different circumstances, provides no evidence that sticking to the 16000 capacity that was in the BP proposal would break the club. It hasn't been stuck to because, since the BP redevelopment plan was drawn up, the club has decided to opt for attempted stability as a lower division club. Another Rochdale or Bury. I thought one of the factors was something to do with a world recession and BP land no longer being of the same value. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 the better the product on the pitch, the more bums on seats. That is the single most important factor and the area of the business where TTA have hopelessly failed........The 5 year plan of Championship football hasn't happened and for that reason alone we are now scaling down our development plan to a 12,000 seater stadium in an area what will probably provide the cheapest option. Absolutely correct. I simply don't see how anybody can argue otherwise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 I thought one of the factors was something to do with a world recession and BP land no longer being of the same value. Those are undoubtedly factors in what's going on (as I predicted they would be). But I still don't believe that an extra 4000 seats would send the club to the wall. Apparently Southend and Brighton have managed to give the worldwide recession/depression the slip and somehow find the money for non-embarrssing stadiums. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 I didnt select a target as has been pointed out, reading between the lines is not just the doom and gloomers perogative, however it does seem to be them that are using information not released by the club as brickbat to point out the flaws in anything that they have released officially. Who's 'using information not released by the club?' What information is this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 Apparently Southend and Brighton have managed to give the worldwide recession/depression the slip and somehow find the money for non-embarrssing stadiums. You dont seriously expect Latics to compete with clubs the size of Southend and Brighton do you ?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 I didnt select a target as has been pointed out, reading between the lines is not just the doom and gloomers perogative, however it does seem to be them that are using information not released by the club as brickbat to point out the flaws in anything that they have released officially. I think are worries come from the lack of real information on the project... So I don't understand your point... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.