FanchesterCity said:dannybcity said:FanchesterCity said:Disagree.
At present it's only that, but if you build an expansion and don't fill it regularly, the press will be all over it with 'white elephant' stories.
It's a non story right now because most of the time we're sold out. It becomes a very different story if most of the time you're not sold out.
Are you suggesting that players won't sign for the club because we didn't fill a 80k stadium week by week because I doubt that would be a consideration for any potential signing? Or do you think people would be put off from attending?
I'm not trying to be facetious but I'm struggling to see where you think the issue would lie.
I never mentioned players, I doubt they care one jot.
The issue is that the City project is a very visible one, and there's plenty of media who'd be happy to see aspects of it fail.
If we built an expansion that was too big and couldn't fill it regularly, it'd be all over the media and portrayed as a 'white elephant'.
We fill the stadium almost all the time right now, and have a few iffy games with empty seats. That's no big deal.
It's very different if we build for 80K and the vast majority of the time we can't fill it, very different indeed.
If Barca or Real don't sell out, that's different, because they haven't built a new expansion to grow into and 'failed' to grow into it. That is precisely what we'd be accused of.
Ask yourself this... if 80K is that obvious, why aren't we doing it now? - I suggest it's because City have done their homework correctly and chosen the optimal size for the next few years. After that... who knows, we can look again and expand again. I don't think they want to take too big a leap.
dannybcity said:FanchesterCity said:dannybcity said:Are you suggesting that players won't sign for the club because we didn't fill a 80k stadium week by week because I doubt that would be a consideration for any potential signing? Or do you think people would be put off from attending?
I'm not trying to be facetious but I'm struggling to see where you think the issue would lie.
I never mentioned players, I doubt they care one jot.
The issue is that the City project is a very visible one, and there's plenty of media who'd be happy to see aspects of it fail.
If we built an expansion that was too big and couldn't fill it regularly, it'd be all over the media and portrayed as a 'white elephant'.
We fill the stadium almost all the time right now, and have a few iffy games with empty seats. That's no big deal.
It's very different if we build for 80K and the vast majority of the time we can't fill it, very different indeed.
If Barca or Real don't sell out, that's different, because they haven't built a new expansion to grow into and 'failed' to grow into it. That is precisely what we'd be accused of.
Ask yourself this... if 80K is that obvious, why aren't we doing it now? - I suggest it's because City have done their homework correctly and chosen the optimal size for the next few years. After that... who knows, we can look again and expand again. I don't think they want to take too big a leap.
I'm not suggesting that 80k is obvious. I just disagree that the media, and how they might portray any empty seats, should be a consideration.
waspish said:Will some of our fans get a back bone who gives a shit if the media take the piss! I don't give toss if we had a 100k stadium and we had 20k turning up every week because I'd be one of those 20k and that's all I care about
FanchesterCity said:waspish said:Will some of our fans get a back bone who gives a shit if the media take the piss! I don't give toss if we had a 100k stadium and we had 20k turning up every week because I'd be one of those 20k and that's all I care about
You're right, it doesn't really matter to us, other that the odd bit of crap from other fans, but PR and headlines are still important to sponsors, and probably to the owners too. The Tevez debacle and Toure last year are not good.
I don't think we'll take any bullying by the media, but I do think we're as image conscious as anybody and will do what we can to avoid any negative stuff as best we can.
Go back a few pages, jrb usually posts loads, but someone else posted new ones just this week.... entire top tier now looks to be in place! (the concrete steps/seating)Citizen Green said:Has anyone got an up to date photo of the South Stand?.
JOGAMIGMOG said:I really hope so. Call me selfish but I'll be into my 60s and some will not be around to see another ten years or so. I'm sure we could build one stand a season and that way 90odd percent of us could get to see the club as the finished article within four years not ten or more.
FanchesterCity said:JOGAMIGMOG said:FanchesterCity said:I think we all love the idea! but it's the reality of it.
80K for a derby, yeah we could do it. But the rest of the year? nah. It'd be bad PR for us and I've no idea how much extra it would cost to get 80K, it could be ludicrously expensive for all we know.
I will hate it when the capacity record goes. Been proud of that all my life.
The sad thing is the rags will probably find a way to build over the train line and expand their shitty main stand one day. It will be they who break the record not us. Unless we say fuck it let's build it anyway. Let's face it, we have the money and the stadium expenditure doesn't count towards ffp does it not? I say let's do it 85,000!
Not sure about that, demand at United seems to be diminishing. That could change, but right now, the tide is turning against them.
They need CL, top players and trophies to keep their capacity full. Without that, the numbers will fall.