I see your point about the cost of the stand. The roof issues would presumably apply to the North Stand as well.Great post mate, it's a very good point regarding inflation.
The £50m figure is what I have always seen quoted as the price of the South Stand rebuild. Maybe this is inaccurate, maybe the additional cost was due to the unique roof we have. I'm not sure.
But I agree with you, looking at the basic supply and demand argument, there isn't really a viable case to go ahead with an expansion right now. Perhaps in one or two years time there will be a compelling case for expansion? Who knows, I certainly hope so.
I'm not sure how much an additional 6k on our capacity will affect commercial deals. Personally, I don't think it will have too much of an impact, if any at all.
Of course it would be great as a fan to have 60k plus blues there every week. An extra 6k cheaper seats to bring back some of our core fans who can't currently afford it would be brilliant and hopefully help with atmosphere. But being realistic, the only way that can happen financially is if prices increase elsewhere and there is more corporate seats. I just don't think the demand is there for corporate tickets yet at The Etihad.
I wonder what you could possibly mean??
正在发生
There is also a proviso that if we don't build on it, it will revert back to the council.
Do we know what the deadline is on [the site reverting to the Council]?
Haha! Maine Road must have done wonders for your mild OCD! ;-)
You're obviously in the industry mate and know far more than me on the subject. I'm just looking at the figures and using some common sense and to me I can't see how expanding the North Stand is commercially viable right now.
What are your thoughts if you were being objective?
The proposed way it was to be dealt with is set out here: http://www.manchester.gov.uk/egov_downloads/MCFCEastManchester.pdf - see point 4.4 on page 15 of the 39 contained in the PDF file that opens if you follow the above link. It doesn't automatically revert; the Council has a right to buy it back.
The Council was to dispose of the collar site land to the development JV (to be owned 20% by MCC and 80% by MCFC) with the Council having "the right to take the lease back from the ”JV” Development Company Limited at market value" in the event that "less than 25% of the Collar Site has been redeveloped within 15 years of the grant of the lease". I think the lease was entered into in 2012, so there are 11 more years to develop a quarter of the site before MCC's right would come into play.
When I spoke to someone at the club last year they were trying to make it viable. The South stand was easier as it allowed the club to increase revenue on tier 2. Also there is the added factor of demolishing the souvenir shop and remodelling City Square. I was told it would be done in a season or two maybe 12 months ago. Laings were offering savings for continuity of work but once the cabins went it was clear it was not imminent. I am told the club were looking at incorporating maybe an indoor venue into the stand - maybe like a mini basketball arena or ice arena or something along those lines to see if they could make it stack up and also long term benefits of a huge Kop - Dortmund Style - in my opinion that will make the stadium look even more disjointed.
As for the collar site - I cant see anything imminent but that is just a hunch rather than anything concrete. As Tolmie says maybe our Chinese Friends are starting something.
The club a few years back wanted 100k on a new site - training ground but it would not look good for the council to have demolished the Etihad. I can't see us being in it in 20 years in my honest opinion.
When I spoke to someone at the club last year they were trying to make it viable. The South stand was easier as it allowed the club to increase revenue on tier 2. Also there is the added factor of demolishing the souvenir shop and remodelling City Square. I was told it would be done in a season or two maybe 12 months ago. Laings were offering savings for continuity of work but once the cabins went it was clear it was not imminent. I am told the club were looking at incorporating maybe an indoor venue into the stand - maybe like a mini basketball arena or ice arena or something along those lines to see if they could make it stack up and also long term benefits of a huge Kop - Dortmund Style - in my opinion that will make the stadium look even more disjointed.
As for the collar site - I cant see anything imminent but that is just a hunch rather than anything concrete. As Tolmie says maybe our Chinese Friends are starting something.
The club a few years back wanted 100k on a new site - training ground but it would not look good for the council to have demolished the Etihad. I can't see us being in it in 20 years in my honest opinion.
I'm sure they have done the maths but it surely cannot be more financially viable to expand the 4 sides in such a difficult way compared with a new stadium.
I understand the needs of the Council but would it really lead to demolition if a new stadium could be built on the same larger site area ?. Is 2 stadiums out of the question now that ADUG and the Council are apparently close partners in other non football projects are have we passed the point of no return ?.
When I spoke to someone at the club last year they were trying to make it viable. The South stand was easier as it allowed the club to increase revenue on tier 2. Also there is the added factor of demolishing the souvenir shop and remodelling City Square. I was told it would be done in a season or two maybe 12 months ago. Laings were offering savings for continuity of work but once the cabins went it was clear it was not imminent. I am told the club were looking at incorporating maybe an indoor venue into the stand - maybe like a mini basketball arena or ice arena or something along those lines to see if they could make it stack up and also long term benefits of a huge Kop - Dortmund Style - in my opinion that will make the stadium look even more disjointed.
As for the collar site - I cant see anything imminent but that is just a hunch rather than anything concrete. As Tolmie says maybe our Chinese Friends are starting something.
The club a few years back wanted 100k on a new site - training ground but it would not look good for the council to have demolished the Etihad. I can't see us being in it in 20 years in my honest opinion.
I've posted similar points in the past.
ADUG simply wont go ahead unless the partner(s) in the leisure destination is world class. Until very recently there were no firm ideas on how to move forwards.
I'm led to believe that there are now some conversations about getting things started so that they break ground this decade.
Incidentally MCC dont want the land back as they have even less chance of turning it into something useful so I would expect an extension to any timeframes would be easy to sort.
I did once post saying that IMHO we were looking at quite a number of years before everything was completed and that was pre-oil crash!
For once though it might be that we hear something about the collar site, at least this year.
Aside from the shop what are the difference between the two end stands are they not identical ? With the proposed development also identical ? You seem to be saying that the end yet to be done is more complex and less profitable why ?
I see 100'0s of empty seats nearly everytime I see Bara play in the Camp Nou, but I never here it said against them.
Stop worrying about what the media say about us.
Because the club have maxed out the corporate element and don't sell out the boxes most weeks so there is no need to make more. They made a lot more expensive second tier seats by doing the North Stand. This is not possible this time round.
Those fans that don't go.......I know of thousands of fans who can no longer go, due to the cost's and difficulty in getting tickets. This does not only apply to City I might add. There are a considerable number of fans who want to go.
What an incredible thing it would be for Sheik Mansour to complete a very high capacity stadium, that had incredible corporate facilities but also 10,000's seat available at reasonable cost to the fans who are now priced of watching the club they love.
On the Nike deal....how do you think Nike or any other manufacturer price up a sponsorship deal>? Units sold that's how, hence why are deal is considerably less than the rags, Liverpool and even Arsenal. You put an extra 10,000 people in the stadium each week, some of those fans are going to buy kit/merchandise, that's going to raise the income from Nike considerably.
Watch West Ham's next few sponsorship deals, they will be considerably higher than of recent, why, 60,000 punters every game and playing in the Olympic Stadium, not the sh1t hole that was Upton Park.
Re the Etihad deal, I think you will be shocked in a few weeks time, Etihad are utterly overjoyed with our deal and there will be a very serious increase in that deal pending.
Sounds like you know something come on give us more of hint please please
I get that but I doubt a short term return on capital outlay was ever the prime objective. It's all about making City the most compelling football club in the Premier league and for that we need an expanded groundBecause the club have maxed out the corporate element and don't sell out the boxes most weeks so there is no need to make more. They made a lot more expensive second tier seats by doing the North Stand. This is not possible this time round.
Come on spill what do you know about the Etihad deal