North Stand Construction Discussion

SiMCFC said:
Is the cablenet system for the roof quite a rare way to build such a large roof? Looking at pictures of similar sized stadiums there doesn't seem to be that many, I'm guessing this has made things a lot harder than 4 'independent' roofs that don't support each other?
Click to expand...
There's quite a few from a quick look, Spurs for starters stands out. The Millennium Dome built in London although having a fabric roof was still the same design. The Olympic Stadium in Munich is similar.

It certainly presents some interesting engineering problems if changing the roof.

Edit: WHU's London Stadium has one as well.
 
Last edited:
SiMCFC said:
Is the cablenet system for the roof quite a rare way to build such a large roof? Looking at pictures of similar sized stadiums there doesn't seem to be that many, I'm guessing this has made things a lot harder than 4 'independent' roofs that don't support each other?
Click to expand...

It is more efficient as a whole, because there is less bulk of grounded steelwork with strong connections and bracing. And far less material and weight in general.

You can see the amount of steelwork just in the two towers built so far, and that costs a fair bit compared to say two large piers and 18 cables. It arguably makes it harder to alter, but I think it is also quite hard to alter big beefy steel structures too like in other more 'conventional' stadiums, where there would be more material wastage and material in general. As you can see for example with the struggles at Anfield and the Toilet, where to replace a side it could be as far as demolishing and rebuilding almost the entire side.

As I understand it, each of the 4 sides can still be replaced individually, as long as the corner junctions (the larger node you see below) are are kept under tension/tightened. But they need ultimately (re)connected between them to stop twisting.

1000015455.jpg1000015456.jpg

Edit, the cornerstay ties are actually staying as part of the north stand refurb (they are the two side smaller cable anchors).
 
Last edited:
Alex - City Matters said:
Wednesday did feel particularly egregious in this regard, particularly with the number of “influencers” in the home end. This was particularly annoying for me given the good step we achieved with the matchday criteria. So it pretty much points to the third party resale websites or the hospitality packages which aren’t subject to rigorous criteria.

Given this isn’t the first time something like this has happened, it won’t surprise you to know that I’ve asked about this before. That said, very happy to do so again, as me and a few others were preparing to do. At this point, the club are focused on the new Ticketing Compliance role to undertake a strategic review of the issue. I don’t want to prejudge a role, but the proof will be in the pudding.

As an aside, until very recently, the club followed Live Football Tickets on Twitter. It’s “one of the biggest sites in operation,” the club’s words not mine. They believed this must have been in error but couldn’t determine when this happened. Optically, that really doesn’t help anyone.




When I was writing my first post, I did think about specific points - so this will be really helpful.
Click to expand...
the osc have raised this issue before and were particularly worried about playing a few teams whose fans would get in the home areas in large numbers

the celtic game was the scenario of city fans biggest nightmare but the club didnt want to listen and didnt seem to be bothered as to why that happened, nor care that the celtic game came so close to really really big trouble
 
Alex - City Matters said:
Wednesday did feel particularly egregious in this regard, particularly with the number of “influencers” in the home end. This was particularly annoying for me given the good step we achieved with the matchday criteria. So it pretty much points to the third party resale websites or the hospitality packages which aren’t subject to rigorous criteria.

Given this isn’t the first time something like this has happened, it won’t surprise you to know that I’ve asked about this before. That said, very happy to do so again, as me and a few others were preparing to do. At this point, the club are focused on the new Ticketing Compliance role to undertake a strategic review of the issue. I don’t want to prejudge a role, but the proof will be in the pudding.

As an aside, until very recently, the club followed Live Football Tickets on Twitter. It’s “one of the biggest sites in operation,” the club’s words not mine. They believed this must have been in error but couldn’t determine when this happened. Optically, that really doesn’t help anyone.




When I was writing my first post, I did think about specific points - so this will be really helpful.
Click to expand...
There are an awful lot of groups, schools and so on with purchase history now. You see them at the group stage games that many blouses swerve.
 
Alex - City Matters said:
City Matters and the 1894 Group have the next meeting with the club on the North Stand a week on Monday.

It’s my understanding that the club will be bringing some more concrete plans on things like seating and hospitality.

Based on the research I have seen (both produced by the club and elsewhere) and my own opinion, I’m quite clear that I want the North Stand to be a vocal, atmospheric end, complete with additional new season tickets. That said, if people do have strong opinions that it should be something else, then I will get that across.

Happy for people to leave comments here, or equally send me an email at: alex.howell@citymatters.co.uk
Click to expand...

The majority of people on here want the North Stand to become a new home end.

So the questions will have to be - what is the likely pricing for the GA and GA+ tickets in the new stand?

Can they provide safe standing to significant parts of it to incentivise it as a home end?

Can they offer a priority relocation window to existing season ticket holders in singing sections to relocate to the new stand to form a home end?

Can they work with 1894 in order to get the home end marketed and priced correctly so it works?

Any new season tickets they look to sell should be after fans have relocated rather than in all together in one section. Let existing season ticket holders move first.
 
supercity88 said:
The majority of people on here want the North Stand to become a new home end.

So the questions will have to be - what is the likely pricing for the GA and GA+ tickets in the new stand?

Can they provide safe standing to significant parts of it to incentivise it as a home end?

Can they offer a priority relocation window to existing season ticket holders in singing sections to relocate to the new stand to form a home end?

Can they work with 1894 in order to get the home end marketed and priced correctly so it works?

Any new season tickets they look to sell should be after fans have relocated rather than in all together in one section. Let existing season ticket holders move first.
Click to expand...
Let all 'vacated' seats by the relocators be offered to the priority waiting list first.

'Shuffle' seats around to enable multiples together, they'll be more convenient and in demand.

Shift the away fans round the corner of SS1 & ES1 & market SS3 as the second home end.

Restrict all 'tourist' tickets to agencies, hotels etc and Uber price them for the privilege.

This is probably the last chance to give us the set up that's been missing since the stadium opened.
 
supercity88 said:
The majority of people on here want the North Stand to become a new home end.

So the questions will have to be - what is the likely pricing for the GA and GA+ tickets in the new stand?

Can they provide safe standing to significant parts of it to incentivise it as a home end?

Can they offer a priority relocation window to existing season ticket holders in singing sections to relocate to the new stand to form a home end?

Can they work with 1894 in order to get the home end marketed and priced correctly so it works?

Any new season tickets they look to sell should be after fans have relocated rather than in all together in one section. Let existing season ticket holders move first.
Click to expand...

Regarding that GA+ section, personally I think people need to be a little bit open minded that the explanation the club give (if they do) just may not align with their own conclusions on that area.

I.e I doubt the club are thinking of the padding on the seats as 'tunnel club in the middle of the yellow wall' or that it is the complete opposite of a proper home end and atmosphere.

I can imagine them thinking they are simpy catering for a variety of blues with an offering in a prime location that will be popular with people more ready to spend a bit. I could be wrong. What I don't see happening is the club removing that section, and maybe people need to prepare themselves for that.

I thought all other questions listed by jrb were spot on and fair, for what it's worth.
 
Distraction.

If any of the drone flyers are reading this thread, next time you are out it would be good if you could zoom in on the item below. I doubt step ladders will see over the fencing.

Hard to say from this far, but wouldn't put it past being the mock-up panel. Right height and from the side looks like it is supported on a triangle frame, so makes me think it could be the panel. Also means it is away from the main working site where they can bring in people to see it without going through the real grit.

1000015601.jpg
 
Gone for a Burton said:
Let all 'vacated' seats by the relocators be offered to the priority waiting list first.

'Shuffle' seats around to enable multiples together, they'll be more convenient and in demand.

Shift the away fans round the corner of SS1 & ES1 & market SS3 as the second home end.

Restrict all 'tourist' tickets to agencies, hotels etc and Uber price them for the privilege.

This is probably the last chance to give us the set up that's been missing since the stadium opened.
Click to expand...
Can't see many moving from SS1. It's a good atmosphere in there and a lot of it is generated from the banter with the away fans
 
Coatigan said:
Regarding that GA+ section, personally I think people need to be a little bit open minded that the explanation the club give (if they do) just may not align with their own conclusions on that area.

I.e I doubt the club are thinking of the padding on the seats as 'tunnel club in the middle of the yellow wall' or that it is the complete opposite of a proper home end and atmosphere.

I can imagine them thinking they are simpy catering for a variety of blues with an offering in a prime location that will be popular with people more ready to spend a bit. I could be wrong. What I don't see happening is the club removing that section, and maybe people need to prepare themselves for that.

I thought all other questions listed by jrb were spot on and fair, for what it's worth.
Click to expand...

The GA+ isn't going anywhere so it's just about finding out roughly what the cost is going to be to understand what impact it will have. The design suggests it will be seats in a great location and a pay as you go bar and nothing more so it shouldn't be an issue - but it would be good to know how much more they're likely to cost and just put across the fact that it should be a budget "premium" seat to ensure it doesn't compromise the stand.

I still stand by the fact that pricing the rest of the stand, getting safe standing and getting the price and marketing/relocation right is the key and if the club do that it doesn't matter about a small section of "premium" seating, we'll still have 8,000+ blues together making a racket in a stand designed for noise.

The club has to make more money. More seats help, but we're still way down on our rivals and whilst it's small fry compared to commercial revenue, the club don't want to be losing money every season to our rivals. The hotel, skybar and improved City Square/museum/shop will all help. And I'm hoping they can be used to offset some early incentives to get this as a new home end price wise. Even if tickets then gradually increase over time.

Financially incentivise singers to move into it, and others to relocate and then new season ticket prices can be expensive on the basis of the football on offer. New season ticket buyers should be charged for the privilege of watching City.
 
Would it make sense to relocated the GA+ to under the sky bar at the back of the new stand, allow the safe standing at the front (where the current north stand is?) and allow us to put flags along the front, not over the advertising, but on the first set of rails like the SS3 away end?)
 
bluesmith said:
It should all be safe standing including the GA+ area.
Click to expand...

Maybe one day, they will be. It lends itself to it. Who knows why the club are not going straight into safe standing, and why they are doing seats first that can relatively easily change to it. Maybe they think it is too much of a jump and filling it is their first priority and then seeing after that whether there is appetite for safe standing. Maybe they think it is an easier ride through planning, or the build. Agree though, that would be great to see.

supercity88 said:
The GA+ isn't going anywhere so it's just about finding out roughly what the cost is going to be to understand what impact it will have. The design suggests it will be seats in a great location and a pay as you go bar and nothing more so it shouldn't be an issue - but it would be good to know how much more they're likely to cost and just put across the fact that it should be a budget "premium" seat to ensure it doesn't compromise the stand.

I still stand by the fact that pricing the rest of the stand, getting safe standing and getting the price and marketing/relocation right is the key and if the club do that it doesn't matter about a small section of "premium" seating, we'll still have 8,000+ blues together making a racket in a stand designed for noise.

The club has to make more money. More seats help, but we're still way down on our rivals and whilst it's small fry compared to commercial revenue, the club don't want to be losing money every season to our rivals. The hotel, skybar and improved City Square/museum/shop will all help. And I'm hoping they can be used to offset some early incentives to get this as a new home end price wise. Even if tickets then gradually increase over time.

Financially incentivise singers to move into it, and others to relocate and then new season ticket prices can be expensive on the basis of the football on offer. New season ticket buyers should be charged for the privilege of watching City.
Click to expand...

I can't imagine it being about money. Not primarily. Just how much extra money can that 8% of new seats really bring in as a blick itself, what maybe an exta 5-10% income to the whole? Hardly that noticeable in the grand scheme of things, there will be far more profitable areas of the stand than that, including the hotel suites and vip offerings. I would imagine it is more about making it seem more attractive to a large group of varied fans they can sell it to, or help decide to relocate there. Maybe there is a bit of planning apeasement in it too. Again, just my own guesswork.
 
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