North Stand Construction Discussion

jrb said:
I think once the NS is completed that will be the stadium finished. I’m not saying forever, but certainly for the majority of our lifetimes. Once the NS expansion is completed, including the hotel, fanzone, etc, City will move on to the Collar site proposal. It really wouldn’t surprise me if plans were already in place and signed off by Sheikh Mansour so it’s ready to go in 3 to 4 years time. The Collar site will probably be the last piece of the Etihad Campus jigsaw unless there are plans to do something with the back car parks?
Click to expand...

But how will they constructionwash their filthy oil money then, if that's where they stop?
 
jrb said:
I think once the NS is completed that will be the stadium finished. I’m not saying forever, but certainly for the majority of our lifetimes. Once the NS expansion is completed, including the hotel, fanzone, etc, City will move on to the Collar site proposal. It really wouldn’t surprise me if plans were already in place and signed off by Sheikh Mansour so it’s ready to go in 3 to 4 years time. The Collar site will probably be the last piece of the Etihad Campus jigsaw unless there are plans to do something with the back car parks?
Click to expand...

I think it depends on what can be done with the side stands. If there's an opportunity to increase revenues substantially through further development then they'll explore it. It doesn't necessarily mean a huge number of additional seats, but potentially providing the infrastructure to get more cash in or provide the facilities for multi-sport events to capitalise on that market. You have NFL and MLB going to London for events, you'd imagine our owners would like to try and tap into that commercial revenue as a northern base.

But it all depends on the feasibility and logistics. If our revenue is far below our competition I can't see them standing still even if it costs a fortune in the short term to catch up.
 
supercity88 said:
I think it depends on what can be done with the side stands. If there's an opportunity to increase revenues substantially through further development then they'll explore it. It doesn't necessarily mean a huge number of additional seats, but potentially providing the infrastructure to get more cash in or provide the facilities for multi-sport events to capitalise on that market. You have NFL and MLB going to London for events, you'd imagine our owners would like to try and tap into that commercial revenue as a northern base.

But it all depends on the feasibility and logistics. If our revenue is far below our competition I can't see them standing still even if it costs a fortune in the short term to catch up.
Click to expand...
Spurs get NFL games as the stadium was built to be easily converted. The same reason they bizarrely have boxing on in winter and still protect the pitch.

West Ham get baseball games due to the ridiculous shape of the playing area on their pitch.

City cant do anything with the pitch space so hardly any advantage in developing east and west stands bar a small increase in capacity.

Far too expensive for too little gain- as JRB states - the NS will be final capacity increase.
 
jrb said:
I think once the NS is completed that will be the stadium finished. I’m not saying forever, but certainly for the majority of our lifetimes. Once the NS expansion is completed, including the hotel, fanzone, etc, City will move on to the Collar site proposal. It really wouldn’t surprise me if plans were already in place and signed off by Sheikh Mansour so it’s ready to go in 3 to 4 years time. The Collar site will probably be the last piece of the Etihad Campus jigsaw unless there are plans to do something with the back car parks?
Click to expand...
Wasn't there mention of the existing roofs being in worse condition than expected for their age, spotted when doing the South Stand, and therefore will need attention? Or did I make that up?
 
Citizen of Legoland said:
Wasn't there mention of the existing roofs being in worse condition than expected for their age, spotted when doing the South Stand, and therefore will need attention? Or did I make that up?
Click to expand...
Yes your right ! Something to do with a plywood sound muting layer in between the roof roting away ! Not incorporated in the new North Stand expansion or the South Stand roof !
 
Prophet of Doom said:
Spurs get NFL games as the stadium was built to be easily converted. The same reason they bizarrely have boxing on in winter and still protect the pitch.

West Ham get baseball games due to the ridiculous shape of the playing area on their pitch.

City cant do anything with the pitch space so hardly any advantage in developing east and west stands bar a small increase in capacity.

Far too expensive for too little gain- as JRB states - the NS will be final capacity increase.
Click to expand...

The recent comments from some of the directors suggest that.

If you minus the additional cost of the hotel, fan zone, souvenir store, museum, offices, etc, the cost of the actual NS expansion would have been relatively cheap in comparison..

Whereas expanding either the ES or/and the CBS would be a lot more expensive.

I think people forget how long, deep and curved the 3rd tiers are, and how big and complex the roofs are above each side stand.
 
Citizen of Legoland said:
Wasn't there mention of the existing roofs being in worse condition than expected for their age, spotted when doing the South Stand, and therefore will need attention? Or did I make that up?
Click to expand...
Yes , so if that suggests those roofs need replacement whatever happens, then maybe they would look at adding seats at that time, would be silly to replace the roof and then look at adding seats as that would mean the roof coming off again.
 
blueparrot said:
Yes , so if that suggests those roofs need replacement whatever happens, then maybe they would look at adding seats at that time, would be silly to replace the roof and then look at adding seats as that would mean the roof coming off again.
Click to expand...

It would just be panelling within the roof. They wouldn’t need to pull down the actual structure.
 
jrb said:
Not criticising the gate or no shows. It was just a pity there were so many empty seats when City fans who wanted to go couldn’t get a ticket because it was sold out on the OS.
Click to expand...
Genuinely, the place looked pretty full to me. I thought the showing was decent
 
Worsleyweb said:
6 weeks behind programme allready.
Click to expand...

Which Programme?

The one that was presented to the council back in May (and then a similar shortened version by Sisk a month or so ago as part of the condition discharge), no not really. Or at least too early to tell, given this phase has another 4 or 5 weeks to run.
 
Gordyola said:
Also if City bought the stadium the proceeds go to Sport England as you say the £4M goes to City of Manchester and is ring fenced for sport. The payment is actually more as we also pay for any game over and above the 19 PL games and I think other events When the Etihad sponsorship was announced a percentage of that goes to the council City contribution a considerable amount to the confers of the City unlike the rags who will only pay council tax to Trafford Brough Council
Click to expand...
I thought the council just get a flat fee now with nothing extra regardless?
 
I also thought it was £3m for the lease and an extra £1m per season(I forget the term used) so City can keep all revenues for none football events at the stadium. Whether or not the new expansion plans will mean the existing agreement will be amended again, I don't know.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top