New stadium thread

[100% Anti Kingsford]

Saying there is 'No Plan B' is not true.  Kingsford is Plan C (this was stated at the Consultant Meeting at Woodhill Hse).

 

Kingsford is not Plan A - it is another in a long line of plans after Loriston, Calder Park, Bellfield, Balgownie etc etc.

 

Stating this (Kingsford) is Plan A and there is nothing else is part of the artificial political rhetoric around the whole concept.  There are tons of plans could be embarked upon via proper collaboration with right people.

 

Have Aberdeen FC ever though of starting a conversation by asking ACC 'Ok, where can we build'?

 

George Yule is becoming like a broken record, privately he is grey with worry about this whole thing dying on its arse but says one thing to the press and another inside Pittodrie.

 

The guy has turned into bullcr*per gambling on this very concept with his fake optimism.

[Dunty]

Disingenuous......

 

"The local Development Plan identifies land at Calder Park (Opportunity Site OP80)

for a new stadium and sports facilities for Cove Rangers Football Club (CRFC). A

detailed planning application for the above proposal was submitted jointly by

CRFC and Aberdeen Football Club (AFC) in August 2011 and was approved by the

Council’s Development Management Sub Committee in January 2012. ACC have

subsequently taken control of the land at Calder Park previously leased to CRFC

and have issued a refusal of Landlord’s Consent for the revised development

proposals on the site, although there is an ongoing commitment to assist with

the club relocation. The proposed sharing of training facilities between CRFC and

AFC is therefore no longer possible and a final decision by AFC on the future

of their proposals is unknown at this time. For the purposes of this Framework,

it is assumed that proposals for each club will proceed in a similar form, albeit

without shared facilities. It is assumed however that any revised proposals for the

relocation of CRFC will require the provision of community facilities at Calder Park

which may be utilised by the existing communities at Cove, Nigg and Kincorth and

the proposed adjoining community at Loirston"

 

ie. It's a deid duck

 

Is that not from 2012?

 

This is from the updated LDP, which was released just two months ago.

 

 

2.25 Loirston is considered suitable for a new football stadium and a site has been identified to accommodate this as part of a mixed use area. The site can also accommodate 1,500 homes and 11 hectares of employment land. It benefits from being close to a major junction with the AWPR. A new City South Academy is planned for Calder Park.

[Edinburghdon]

Hold on.

 

ACC have on several occasions tried to play ball with AFC as regards stadiums and sites for new stadiums.  Countless times.

 

Aberdeen FC simply do not want to play ball for whatever political reasons.  One of the clear economic reasons is that they do not want to have to pay Council for land.  The Council are desperate for cash - dying for funds and they have masses of land available far bigger than Kingsford.

 

Its so political this whole context its incredible.

 

They (AFC) want to make money out of selling land (Pittodrie) but they don't want to have to pay for land. 

 

One of the big problems with this whole 'new stadium' conundrum (may I remind you this all goes back to 1999) is that Aberdeen have a political agenda to move from Pittodrie at all costs for a 'House in the Hamptons'.

 

The club have REFUSED to collaborate with just about anyone other than potential private investors. 

 

However, collaboration should have been at the CENTRE of the Kingsford concept instead what they have done is rode slipshod over just about every local and regional planning policy, ignored fact that proper road and transport plans need to be in place and embarked on a political propaganda campaign that has alienated the community and Council surrounding the plans and angered lots of lifelong fans but calling us 'sentimental'.

 

Even if this gets approved by ACC the word mentioned was Holyrood might get called in - with a veto.

 

What they hell does George Yule know about stadiums? what is his expertise in football ground development?  I can tell him his plans for my club are basically shi*e - amateurish, cheap and nasty crap.

 

Everyone knows Pittodrie is past its sell by date currently.  But its past its sell by date and the pitch is terrible as the club have made every effort to make it crap by cutting off funding streams.

 

Pittodrie could have been developed piece by piece just like every other club have done years ago.  The club could be in a training ground now but they have chosen not to as the strategic direction they want to take is move from Pittodrie at all costs.

 

As regards this 'sentimental' argument.  WTF?  Following your club is a sentimental thing - yes!  Comments like that just show how out of touch George Yule and the people who run the club are with its fans.

 

Moving to Kingsford will entail masses of debt - a mortgage of what £30m?

 

I gave up after your first line. The council hasn't done anything of the sort and the club have tried to make training facilities in partnership with others (the unis etc) and couldn't come to a mutually beneficial agreement. This has been pointed out to you numerous times now.

 

Your complaints against the club would be taken more seriously if they were based on something resembling fact.

[100% Anti Kingsford]

Ha ha.

 

You seem to know it all.   

 

You are so ingrained in red tinted blinkered thinking you refuse to look anywhere below the propaganda of the club and its drive to move to Kingsford.

 

- The club pulled out of the University deals and partnerships.

 

- The Council have offered land, and identified locations - the club have ignored it.

 

 

 

 

[Edinburghdon]

Absolute patronising pish from Yule. It is nothing to do with sentimentality and everything to do with lack of transparency and the simple fact that a lot of folk do not believe a chairman who has spent near on 20 years promoting a vision that most folk didn't agree with until very recently. We have a 12,000 figure (recently down from 12,500) with absolutely no supporting evidence and a transport plan that appears unsuitable at present. Genuine questions requiring genuine answers.

 

Totally agree with this, completely believe the severely reduced capacity claims after speaking to folk like manc who have professional experience in such matters but I reckon the only way to make people see its the truth is the club releasing further information on it. That should have happened long before now.

 

As for the 30 acres pish. That only stands up if we're going by the ludicrous notion that every stadium requires a training ground within 2 metres of it. Nobody is questioning the training facilities on their own. Nobody. It's disingenuous to spout that shite and he knows it. Nae his fault like, where the fuck are the supporting questions? Awful article.

 

I don't think the club has ever claimed that every club needs its own training facility right next to the stadium, you've got to see that it's the most efficient way operationally and financially though. Having the facilities elsewhere although doable would mean a much higher cost when you look at the cost of buying and developing 2 sites. When so many people are talking about the high costs already then you can hardly fault the club for trying everything in their power to minimise the costs.  Saying that I fully expect they'll go down the separate site route if there's no other alternative.

 

But aye you're right, it's a dreadful article both from the perspective of the questions and the answers, does nothing to help the plans.

[Edinburghdon]

Ha ha.

 

You seem to know it all.   

 

You are so ingrained in red tinted blinkered thinking you refuse to look anywhere below the propaganda of the club and its drive to move to Kingsford.

 

- The club pulled out of the University deals and partnerships.

 

- The Council have offered land, and identified locations - the club have ignored it.

 

I'm not claiming to know it all in the slightest... I'm just not going to go around spouting made up pish thats all.

 

The club were in talks with unis about sharing training facilities. That's a fact, widely reported. The reasoning for those plans failing was also widely reported (long before Kingsford was proposed) also a fact. You're somehow forming a link inside your own head that the club pulled out of said plans not for any operational reasons, or for the reasons both parites stated, but for the sole reason that they're hell bent on moving to Kingsford. Before kingsford was ever proposed... seen where the flaw in that arguement is yet?

 

To say that the council have "offered" sites is absolute garbage, as has been pointed out to you on several occasions... you've yet to mention what land was "offered" or back that up with any kind of proof.

 

[Garlogie_Granite]

Hold on.

 

ACC have on several occasions tried to play ball with AFC as regards stadiums and sites for new stadiums.  Countless times.

Utterly false, council did nothing for Bellfield, made no offers surrounding land at the Links, and actively scuppered Loirston once the administration changed

 

Aberdeen FC simply do not want to play ball for whatever political reasons.

What political reasons? this is utter fantasy, they want a new stadium. See previous answer

 

 

 

 

One of the clear economic reasons is that they do not want to have to pay Council for land.  The Council are desperate for cash - dying for funds and they have masses of land available far bigger than Kingsford.

Where? You've been asked this already and ignored the question several times.

 

Just for accuracy, you realise Kingsford is being bought off the Piries right? it's not some sort of freebie!

 

 

 

Its so political this whole context its incredible.

Yes, you've said, there's nothing to support this at all.

 

 

They (AFC) want to make money out of selling land (Pittodrie) but they don't want to have to pay for land.

They want to part finance new stadium by selling - correct. They ARE paying the Pirie brothers for Kingsford, again, it's not free!

 

 

One of the big problems with this whole 'new stadium' conundrum (may I remind you this all goes back to 1999) is that Aberdeen have a political agenda to move from Pittodrie at all costs for a 'House in the Hamptons'.

Why is moving political? what is this rambling nonsense?

 

 

 

The club have REFUSED to collaborate with just about anyone other than potential private investors.

Name one. Who are these private investors? Who's offered collaboration on what? 

 

 

However, collaboration should have been at the CENTRE of the Kingsford concept instead what they have done is rode slipshod over just about every local and regional planning policy, ignored fact that proper road and transport plans need to be in place and embarked on a political propaganda campaign that has alienated the community and Council surrounding the plans and angered lots of lifelong fans but calling us 'sentimental'.

The plans are not approved, so there's no evidence yet of "riding roughshod", what they have done is consulted widely, including three public meetings in Kingswells/Westhills, and one at Pittodrie.

 

The "community" of Westhill and surrounds is far from alienated, plenty of us support the proposal, however the w.a.n.k.s. have obstructed, shouted down, and blocked anyone who dares not agree with their nimbyism.

 

"sentimental" was only rolled out this week, so dinna come the cunt with that one.

 

"political propoganda campaign" - what total drivel. There are for and against politicians from every party except the greens who I think are all against this. So who exactly is this "political propaganda" targetting?

 

 

Even if this gets approved by ACC the word mentioned was Holyrood might get called in - with a veto.

In your "NO" meetings?

 

 

What they hell does George Yule know about stadiums? what is his expertise in football ground development?  I can tell him his plans for my club are basically shi*e - amateurish, cheap and nasty crap.

You realise he's not the architect? You are one I presume?

 

You admit the Dons have come on leaps and bounds since George came on board I presume?

 

 

 

Everyone knows Pittodrie is past its sell by date currently.  But its past its sell by date and the pitch is terrible as the club have made every effort to make it crap by cutting off funding streams.

What are these funding streams?

 

 

Pittodrie could have been developed piece by piece just like every other club have done years ago.  The club could be in a training ground now but they have chosen not to as the strategic direction they want to take is move from Pittodrie at all costs.

That's fair comment, but it's too late now eh? So guess fit, we'll have to move on.

 

 

As regards this 'sentimental' argument.  WTF?  Following your club is a sentimental thing - yes!  Comments like that just show how out of touch George Yule and the people who run the club are with its fans.

Not what he said, he said the habits of going to a certain part of town, and attachment to a set of bricks and mortar are sentimental.

 

Nothing to do with supporting the club!

 

Moving to Kingsford will entail masses of debt - a mortgage of what £30m?

Likely yes, though staying at the links will mean an even bigger borrowing.

[Garlogie_Granite]

 

- The Council have offered land, and identified locations - the club have ignored it.

For the umpteenth time, care to name some, just one would do for now to be going on with?

[tom_widdows]

 

What they hell does George Yule know about stadiums? what is his expertise in football ground development?  I can tell him his plans for my club are basically shi*e - amateurish, cheap and nasty crap.

 

I'm sure John Halliday is desperately awaiting your application to join his team so you can show them how its done

 

[jess]

 

You admit the Dons have come on leaps and bounds since George came on board I presume?

 

Is that related?

 

Our improved fortunes on the pitch and financially are solely down to Derek McInnes...and the mysterious donation from the Donald's.

 

The stadium is in a worse state than ever before and a match was abandoned only a few months ago. No training base after 5 years....what am I missing? Add in a stadium application which so far has been rejected by about 7 consultees.

 

 

[Garlogie_Granite]

Is that related?

 

Our improved fortunes on the pitch and financially are solely down to Derek McInnes...and the mysterious donation from the Donald's.

 

The stadium is in a worse state than ever before and a match was abandoned only a few months ago. No training base after 5 years....what am I missing? Add in a stadium application which so far has been rejected by about 7 consultees.

Yes it's related. When did our more professional approach begin? When did we start to attract investment, like, as you say, WmDonald? When did our merchandising improve?

 

The abandoned match was down to the archaic sub station that services Pittodrie, so you're blaming an external event on George Yule, but the run of improvements which he has a hand in not on him. Incredible.

[manc_don]

Yes it's related. When did our more professional approach begin? When did we start to attract investment, like, as you say, WmDonald? When did our merchandising improve?

 

The abandoned match was down to the archaic sub station that services Pittodrie, so you're blaming an external event on George Yule, but the run of improvements which he has a hand in not on him. Incredible.

 

Absolutely this.  We were a complete laughing stock in the way we approached business prior to his involvement, don't see how anyone can give DM credit for that.  We are run incredibly well nowadays, no more of this third party shite for the club shop etc. He does a lot of excellent work behind the scenes that clearly some do not recognise. To blame him for the flood light failure is laughable and frankly, embarrassing.  The club is better for having Yule on board than not.

[100% Anti Kingsford]

Love this thread.

 

Anyone that disagrees with the resident virtual-clique gets accused of being a specific member / person from Non Kingsford Campaign or whatever they are called.

 

Let me get this right - George Yule is responsible for Aberdeen FC being in the great condition it is in at the moment?

 

Is that right?

[manc_don]

Love this thread.

 

Anyone that disagrees with the resident virtual-clique gets accused of being a specific member / person from Non Kingsford Campaign or whatever they are called.

 

Let me get this right - George Yule is responsible for Aberdeen FC being in the great condition it is in at the moment?

 

Is that right?

 

He is part of the reasons for success off the field, yes.

[jess]

Yes it's related. When did our more professional approach begin? When did we start to attract investment, like, as you say, WmDonald? When did our merchandising improve?

 

The abandoned match was down to the archaic sub station that services Pittodrie, so you're blaming an external event on George Yule, but the run of improvements which he has a hand in not on him. Incredible.

 

Merchandise changed before Yule.

 

McInnes turned us from a running joke into stable world and tim beaters turning a profit after which came bigger deals.

 

I'm looking for what he did. I don't see any training facilities. Pittodrie is almost black and the inside just being left to rot. He thinks coach transport to games from 3 locations is a viable future.

[Edinburghdon]

Love this thread.

 

Anyone that disagrees with the resident virtual-clique gets accused of being a specific member / person from Non Kingsford Campaign or whatever they are called.

 

Let me get this right - George Yule is responsible for Aberdeen FC being in the great condition it is in at the moment?

 

Is that right?

 

The only reason people aren't taking anything you say seriously is because you constantly post nonsense without anything to back that up, then consistently ignore any post asking for anything to back up your fictional claims.

 

There's numerous people with opposing views that have been able to have a rational discussion about the stadium proposal, so your claim that anyone with a different view are disregarded is unsurprisingly a load of pish. Also there's only been one person make any claims about who you are, the rest seem as if they couldn't care.

 

All your posts like this is blatantly to avoid having to answer the questions on the fictional nonsense you're claiming.

 

And aye, Yule has contributed to the club being better run. Not the sole reason but he's sure as hell improved things.

[RicoS321]

Love this thread.

 

Anyone that disagrees with the resident virtual-clique gets accused of being a specific member / person from Non Kingsford Campaign or whatever they are called.

 

Let me get this right - George Yule is responsible for Aberdeen FC being in the great condition it is in at the moment?

 

Is that right?

 

Don't be a dick. You were accused, by one person, miles down the thread. Why can't you just ignore it and raise some valid points backed up with evidence. You refuse to answer simple questions with evidence-based responses, you just repeat shite.

 

I suspect you or I are not a great judge of what Yule has done/not done for the club. The club appear to be better at signing folks (everything kept quiet), but he may not be involved in that side of things. The customer service has improved in my opinion, but that could be down to the general manager. We fall way short in areas like catering but that contract has been in place for some time. We don't appear to be significantly better at marketing, but we've not been in a downward slide since McInnes took over so it's difficult to judge. He may, or may not, have brought in the investment from the Donalds and may or may not have helped facilitate the bank loan repayment. We don't know, you don't know. He may have brokered the signing fee for McLean or maybe he didn't.

 

I'm not sure what his targets are, and I don't believe you know either. He appears to be just a competent business man much like any other and the club don't appear to have made any wild errors under his stewardship. The club is in a much better position than when he arrived and I think it would be very harsh to assume that none of that was down to him.

[Garlogie_Granite]

Love this thread.

 

Anyone that disagrees with the resident virtual-clique gets accused of being a specific member / person from Non Kingsford Campaign or whatever they are called.

 

Let me get this right - George Yule is responsible for Aberdeen FC being in the great condition it is in at the moment?

 

Is that right?

The reason you stand accused of that, is two-fold (and as others have pointed out, just by me, unless one person can be a clique?).

 

1. Despite apparently being a Dons fan for over 50 years, only now are you joining a forum despite them being around for near 20 years, and not a single one of your posts is about the club (I fully now expect a token football post to appear). You'll understand that smells a bit, especially when you weren't equally concerned to rant on forums when the far worse option of Loriston was on the table.

 

2. Partly because on the above, I'm rather suspicious, and your style is very similar to that of one of the biggest gobshites in the 'no' campaign, not just on social media, but via an email exchange that occurred during Feb/March. Very similar.

 

 

But, now there's a third (in bold). For someone so vocifeous in their opposition to the stadium, and as such a long standing Dons fan, you now want us to believe you don't know what the opposition group is actually called? The group that is all over social media, all over the press, and mentioned numerous times on this thread. You want us to believe you have nothing to do with them? Ridiculous.

 

Now, for the umpteenth time, where are these plots of land that the council have offered to AFC that you keep alluding to but never specifying?

 

[OxfordDon]

Let me get this right - George Yule is responsible for Aberdeen FC being in the great condition it is in at the moment?

 

Is that right?

 

Let me help you get it right:

 

The probability that George Yule is solely responsible for AFC's success is exactly the same as the probability that George Yule is solely responsible for the new stadium's issues.

 

Can we move on from conspiracy-driven witchhunting and back to rational debate please?

[jess]

Loirston seemed like insanity till they came up with this, which is just a farce yet has more support because of the outrageous 'might have no club to support' propaganda and the emphasis being on the training facilities at Kingsford.

 

At least far more people could walk and theoretically walk to Loirston, the transport plan for a 21,000 midweek game was approved, and if the train station was rebuilt it would have been pretty good.

[Dunty]

Loirston seemed like insanity till they came up with this, which is just a farce yet has more support because of the outrageous 'might have no club to support' propaganda and the emphasis being on the training facilities at Kingsford.

 

At least far more people could walk and theoretically walk to Loirston, the transport plan for a 21,000 midweek game was approved, and if the train station was rebuilt it would have been pretty good.

 

Agreed. Thought the objections (from Aberdeen fans) were over exaggerated at Loirston, folk saying they would never go back. Is the site not next to the AWPR too, and like you said is close to the train line? We could easily make it work.

[Edinburghdon]

Loirston seemed like insanity till they came up with this, which is just a farce yet has more support because of the outrageous 'might have no club to support' propaganda and the emphasis being on the training facilities at Kingsford.

 

At least far more people could walk and theoretically walk to Loirston, the transport plan for a 21,000 midweek game was approved, and if the train station was rebuilt it would have been pretty good.

 

Could more people have walked to loriston? Might be forgetting the exact location but it always seemed it was just as bad to walk to? Could be wrong though!

[RicoS321]

Could more people have walked to loriston? Might be forgetting the exact location but it always seemed it was just as bad to walk to? Could be wrong though!

 

Nope, it was 3.4 miles form the train station uphill, which is why I was against it too. A station at Altens would have helped mind you. It was equally as accessible by vehicle as Kingsford (given both would/will have been completed post bypass). If a station existed then Loirston would have been better than Kingsford, but still nae great.

 

It's weird, as it didn't seem that there was nearly much support for Loirston as there is for Kingsford. I can only assume it's the northen shire supporters that are pro-Kingsford, although it seems stupid given the bypass would mean probably only an additional ten minutes from Loirston. Or maybe everyone has been worn down? Can anyone on here suggest a reason why Kingsford is better?

[Edinburghdon]

Nope, it was 3.4 miles form the train station uphill, which is why I was against it too. A station at Altens would have helped mind you. It was equally as accessible by vehicle as Kingsford (given both would/will have been completed post bypass). If a station existed then Loirston would have been better than Kingsford, but still nae great.

 

It's weird, as it didn't seem that there was nearly much support for Loirston as there is for Kingsford. I can only assume it's the northen shire supporters that are pro-Kingsford, although it seems stupid given the bypass would mean probably only an additional ten minutes from Loirston. Or maybe everyone has been worn down? Can anyone on here suggest a reason why Kingsford is better?

 

For me it's probably because loriston had been ruled out and there's no site within the city, figure that kingsford ticks as many boxes as possible.

 

Travelling that road every day has probably subconsciously made it into a really short journey too.

[100% Anti Kingsford]

There is more 'support' for Kingsford as the club have embarked upon a ridiculous propaganda campaign which (while we are on the topic) is not based on any rationale arguments i.e. the club is about to 'die' if it all falls through.

 

People actually believe this?

 

They have also used (again) glossy images, and the club website to promote and engaged anyone they can and package it all up as a 'community stadium' that will help the 'fantastic' work of AFCCT and help to attract 'better players'.

 

Unusually they have also alienated a community and encouraged a huge well organised community backlash.

 

We are attracting players from League 1 and League 2 - that is it.  The money is not available training ground or not.

 

Anyone not for Kingsford is and has been labelled 'sentimental' or has 'head in the sand' or like on here is 'not a Dons fan'.

 

Once the Kingsford concept slips away I would not be the slightest bit surprised if Loriston is chosen again as site for development again.

 

Its like a circle of disfunction.