Perhaps I didn’t clarify my position, I wasn’t meaning the design didn’t need consideration, just that I don’t think you would get anything jaw-dropping due to the height restriction and pretty dull siting. I think the way it’s connected to the stadium is the issue, I might have preferred one not connected, but then it may look better if/when we get a full stadium wrap.
Can't expect people staying in the hotel to tramp across the collar site in the glorious Manchestet weather to their seats in the stadium ! So it had to be attached to the stadium makes sense !Again I fundamentally disagree, with that first part at least. I see your point with the second.
But as with the hospitality debate, I know how much work is yet to happen after this gets approved, and how much can change and affect how the final thing looks.
Can't expect people staying in the hotel to tramp across the collar site in the glorious Manchestet weather to their seats in the stadium ! So it had to be attached to the stadium makes sense !
Apart from everything else you've accused me of posting, when did I ever refer to City fans who go into hospitality as 'posh cunts'? Feel free to quote me and repost it.
Regardless if you agree or not, don't like what I post, find what I post repetitive, amongst everything I've posted from the PA, my now boring point about the hospitality section being in the wrong place on L2 still stands. And there are a lot of people on here who agree with me on that point.
As you and others know, I have been fully supportive of the proposal from day one, bar the boxed shaped hotel design, on here and on the fans consultation form. But if you want to tie me down to that single issue, and nothing else I've added to this thread and the general discussion about the proposal, that's up to you.
No idea why you keep mentioning corporate as you've been told multiple times that it's no such thing.When you meet them make these points -
...
Say that these spots could be sold as ‘premium safe standing’ and not hospitality/corporate where those paying a bit extra get access to a better bar area (may already be the case as far as we know) etc.
No idea why you keep mentioning corporate as you've been told multiple times that it's no such thing.
What if they're sold as 'Hospitality Safe Standing' with access to their own bar? Would that satisfy you?
Seeing safe standing isn't included in the design and only mention as later possibility it's not going to be a alternative at present !No idea why you keep mentioning corporate as you've been told multiple times that it's no such thing.
What if they're sold as 'Hospitality Safe Standing' with access to their own bar? Would that satisfy you?
Yes it is it's an alternative mentioned in plans drawn up months ago, and could well have been changed during the consultation and meetings.Seeing safe standing isn't included in the design and only mention as later possibility it's not going to be a alternative at present !
No idea why you keep mentioning corporate as you've been told multiple times that it's no such thing.
What if they're sold as 'Hospitality Safe Standing' with access to their own bar? Would that satisfy you?
Wouldn’t that displace a load of fans currently in those areas? The current plans displace less people.Not on the front rows of the vocal stand it doesn’t.
City could horse-shoe the entire rest of Level 2 in the East, South and Colin Bell stands to increase hospitality and leave the new NSL2 alone and create something special in terms of a vocal stand.
It really doesn’t have to be, and shouldn’t be there.