Etihad Campus, Stadium Development and Collar Site

[richards30]

As someone has mentioned maybe 2 companies will do an end each? All I know is that the RFU have got a confirmed agreement that the capacity will be at the 62,117 ish level for the world cup game at our stadium. They have it in all the itinerary and my rugby mad uncle who corporates at Twickenham every game with bill Beaumont asked the question on my behalf as it was at our stadium. Maybe 2 companies doing an end each would be quicker/more organised? As jrb has stated as well there is already pre-work started behind both stands so would tie in with what I've been told.150% true though that the RFU have documents stating over 62,000 capacity

I'm not refuting any of the above, but the clubs facilities and stadium management won't spend circa 40m just to suit one RFU game, not when return on investment is paramount.

But once xmas and more details are released etc the jnterest will grow mate? People just hear 2015 so think theres no rush? Games would constantly sell out with the pricing structure and the new corporate packages would make a dent in the costings? Love or hate it rich people waste an obscene amount off money with the incrowd and city these days are the incrowd!

 

[Falastur]

As someone has mentioned maybe 2 companies will do an end each? All I know is that the RFU have got a confirmed agreement that the capacity will be at the 62,117 ish level for the world cup game at our stadium. They have it in all the itinerary and my rugby mad uncle who corporates at Twickenham every game with bill Beaumont asked the question on my behalf as it was at our stadium. Maybe 2 companies doing an end each would be quicker/more organised? As jrb has stated as well there is already pre-work started behind both stands so would tie in with what I've been told.150% true though that the RFU have documents stating over 62,000 capacity

Tendering the same job to two competing companies is madness IMO, it only increases the chances that both companies will cut corners and rush their side in order to make the other company look slower than them, not to mention that you vastly increase the chances of the two sides not looking identical, which would not be a good thing. I'd be very disappointed for the status of the British construction industry if there was noone around capable of doing two sides of the same stadium at once.

That said, I think the whole point of the one-side-at-a-time approach is so that we don't cut attendance down to 20,000 a game by having to close off large parts of both sides of the stadium while we build...

 

[pride in battle]

^^^^^^^
No loss of seats as the 'new' stand will be built 'over' the existing stand....

 

[mostonbluemark]

As someone has mentioned maybe 2 companies will do an end each? All I know is that the RFU have got a confirmed agreement that the capacity will be at the 62,117 ish level for the world cup game at our stadium. They have it in all the itinerary and my rugby mad uncle who corporates at Twickenham every game with bill Beaumont asked the question on my behalf as it was at our stadium. Maybe 2 companies doing an end each would be quicker/more organised? As jrb has stated as well there is already pre-work started behind both stands so would tie in with what I've been told.150% true though that the RFU have documents stating over 62,000 capacity

Tendering the same job to two competing companies is madness IMO, it only increases the chances that both companies will cut corners and rush their side in order to make the other company look slower than them, not to mention that you vastly increase the chances of the two sides not looking identical, which would not be a good thing. I'd be very disappointed for the status of the British construction industry if there was noone around capable of doing two sides of the same stadium at once.

That said, I think the whole point of the one-side-at-a-time approach is so that we don't cut attendance down to 20,000 a game by having to close off large parts of both sides of the stadium while we build...

The club has already stated that there will be no loss of capacity as a result of expansion. As for the prospect of two companies working in parallel with each other on separate ends, I agree with you, it doesn't make sense. As others have stated it will be one company doing both ends at the same time.

 

[GXCity]

As someone has mentioned maybe 2 companies will do an end each? All I know is that the RFU have got a confirmed agreement that the capacity will be at the 62,117 ish level for the world cup game at our stadium. They have it in all the itinerary and my rugby mad uncle who corporates at Twickenham every game with bill Beaumont asked the question on my behalf as it was at our stadium. Maybe 2 companies doing an end each would be quicker/more organised? As jrb has stated as well there is already pre-work started behind both stands so would tie in with what I've been told.150% true though that the RFU have documents stating over 62,000 capacity

Tendering the same job to two competing companies is madness IMO, it only increases the chances that both companies will cut corners and rush their side in order to make the other company look slower than them, not to mention that you vastly increase the chances of the two sides not looking identical, which would not be a good thing. I'd be very disappointed for the status of the British construction industry if there was noone around capable of doing two sides of the same stadium at once.

That said, I think the whole point of the one-side-at-a-time approach is so that we don't cut attendance down to 20,000 a game by having to close off large parts of both sides of the stadium while we build...

The same contractor is doing both sides. As you say it would be unworkable for two competitors to work on the same project. Can you imagine it on The Shard for example? First to the top wins.......

 

[Henkeman]

As someone has mentioned maybe 2 companies will do an end each? All I know is that the RFU have got a confirmed agreement that the capacity will be at the 62,117 ish level for the world cup game at our stadium. They have it in all the itinerary and my rugby mad uncle who corporates at Twickenham every game with bill Beaumont asked the question on my behalf as it was at our stadium. Maybe 2 companies doing an end each would be quicker/more organised? As jrb has stated as well there is already pre-work started behind both stands so would tie in with what I've been told.150% true though that the RFU have documents stating over 62,000 capacity

Tendering the same job to two competing companies is madness IMO, it only increases the chances that both companies will cut corners and rush their side in order to make the other company look slower than them, not to mention that you vastly increase the chances of the two sides not looking identical, which would not be a good thing. I'd be very disappointed for the status of the British construction industry if there was noone around capable of doing two sides of the same stadium at once.

That said, I think the whole point of the one-side-at-a-time approach is so that we don't cut attendance down to 20,000 a game by having to close off large parts of both sides of the stadium while we build...

The same contractor is doing both sides. As you say it would be unworkable for two competitors to work on the same project. Can you imagine it on The Shard for example? First to the top wins.......

I must be in a good mood - that made me giggle quite a lot.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

As someone has mentioned maybe 2 companies will do an end each? All I know is that the RFU have got a confirmed agreement that the capacity will be at the 62,117 ish level for the world cup game at our stadium. They have it in all the itinerary and my rugby mad uncle who corporates at Twickenham every game with bill Beaumont asked the question on my behalf as it was at our stadium. Maybe 2 companies doing an end each would be quicker/more organised? As jrb has stated as well there is already pre-work started behind both stands so would tie in with what I've been told.150% true though that the RFU have documents stating over 62,000 capacity

Tendering the same job to two competing companies is madness IMO, it only increases the chances that both companies will cut corners and rush their side in order to make the other company look slower than them, not to mention that you vastly increase the chances of the two sides not looking identical, which would not be a good thing. I'd be very disappointed for the status of the British construction industry if there was noone around capable of doing two sides of the same stadium at once.

That said, I think the whole point of the one-side-at-a-time approach is so that we don't cut attendance down to 20,000 a game by having to close off large parts of both sides of the stadium while we build...

The same contractor is doing both sides. As you say it would be unworkable for two competitors to work on the same project. Can you imagine it on The Shard for example? First to the top wins.......

It's essentially the principle that underpinned the building of first trans-continental railway in the US - one set started on the East Coast and the other on the West Coast (early hip-hop wars anyone?)with a figurative finishing line about two thirds of the way across from the East because of the Rockies iirc. However, as Falastur has said this concept would contain too many fault lines to be worth the risk at the Etihad, although it would make for interesting spread betting over the summer of 2015.

I would be shocked if they didn't do both ends at once. Since September 1st 2008 things haven't been done by halves and impact is a big part of the 'project'. To think they used to use that word as a stick to beat us. Don't see that too much these days.

 

[jrb]

As someone has mentioned maybe 2 companies will do an end each? All I know is that the RFU have got a confirmed agreement that the capacity will be at the 62,117 ish level for the world cup game at our stadium. They have it in all the itinerary and my rugby mad uncle who corporates at Twickenham every game with bill Beaumont asked the question on my behalf as it was at our stadium. Maybe 2 companies doing an end each would be quicker/more organised? As jrb has stated as well there is already pre-work started behind both stands so would tie in with what I've been told.150% true though that the RFU have documents stating over 62,000 capacity

Tendering the same job to two competing companies is madness IMO, it only increases the chances that both companies will cut corners and rush their side in order to make the other company look slower than them, not to mention that you vastly increase the chances of the two sides not looking identical, which would not be a good thing. I'd be very disappointed for the status of the British construction industry if there was noone around capable of doing two sides of the same stadium at once.

That said, I think the whole point of the one-side-at-a-time approach is so that we don't cut attendance down to 20,000 a game by having to close off large parts of both sides of the stadium while we build...

The same contractor is doing both sides. As you say it would be unworkable for two competitors to work on the same project. Can you imagine it on The Shard for example? First to the top wins.......

I.

Haven't BAM swept the board so far. First the training academy and now the bridge. It wouldn't surprise me if they were awarded the stadium expansion as well. Saying that, there is plenty of competition price wise in the construction industry, as you know GX.

However, dealing with 1 major construction firm across all the developments, has numerous advantages.

 

[EricBrooksGhost]

Tendering the same job to two competing companies is madness IMO, it only increases the chances that both companies will cut corners and rush their side in order to make the other company look slower than them, not to mention that you vastly increase the chances of the two sides not looking identical, which would not be a good thing. I'd be very disappointed for the status of the British construction industry if there was noone around capable of doing two sides of the same stadium at once.

That said, I think the whole point of the one-side-at-a-time approach is so that we don't cut attendance down to 20,000 a game by having to close off large parts of both sides of the stadium while we build...

The same contractor is doing both sides. As you say it would be unworkable for two competitors to work on the same project. Can you imagine it on The Shard for example? First to the top wins.......

It's essentially the principle that underpinned the building of first trans-continental railway in the US - one set started on the East Coast and the other on the West Coast (early hip-hop wars anyone?)with a figurative finishing line about two thirds of the way across from the East because of the Rockies iirc. However, as Falastur has said this concept would contain too many fault lines to be worth the risk at the Etihad, although it would make for interesting spread betting over the summer of 2015.

I would be shocked if they didn't do both ends at once. Since September 1st 2008 things haven't been done by halves and impact is a big part of the 'project'. To think they used to use that word as a stick to beat us. Don't see that too much these days.

Now the old west coast boys drafted in a little help from the Chinese when the going got tough; Yang Sing at one end anyone?

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

The same contractor is doing both sides. As you say it would be unworkable for two competitors to work on the same project. Can you imagine it on The Shard for example? First to the top wins.......

It's essentially the principle that underpinned the building of first trans-continental railway in the US - one set started on the East Coast and the other on the West Coast (early hip-hop wars anyone?)with a figurative finishing line about two thirds of the way across from the East because of the Rockies iirc. However, as Falastur has said this concept would contain too many fault lines to be worth the risk at the Etihad, although it would make for interesting spread betting over the summer of 2015.

I would be shocked if they didn't do both ends at once. Since September 1st 2008 things haven't been done by halves and impact is a big part of the 'project'. To think they used to use that word as a stick to beat us. Don't see that too much these days.

Now the old west coast boys drafted in a little help from the Chinese when the going got tough; Yang Sing at one end anyone?

No thanks EBG, it's gone right downhill lately.