New stadium thread

[Edinburghdon]

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'.

 

Actually they haven't, this has been pointed out to you again and again, still hasn't sunk in from the looks of things though...

 

There have also been plenty rational arguments for and against kingsford too, sadly none from you yet.

 

Anything sensible to add? Or you just going to drone on about sentimentality and the fictional offer of land?

[jess]

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?

 

Say No To Kingsford Stadium popped up.

 

People asked questions or tried to wind them up and got blocked and annoyed.

 

Say YES to Kingsford popped up and thousands joined for the laugh.

 

People from No Kingsford made accusations against football fans which galvanised support for it and rooted people into defending even complete tosh.

 

Anyone who questions anything about it on social media are attacked by the baying mob so most who oppose it or have concerns don't say anything and others don't see opposition to it so go along with it.

 

 

The Makro area is an hour's walk from town, which seemed a never going back deal breaker. We've replaced it with a 2 hour walk from town. There's definitely a big silent opposition out there.

[100% Anti Kingsford]

Anyone remember Seinfeld and 'George' and his imaginary House in the Hamptons?

 

Delusion that he has some fancy place but in reality he has been lying about his finances for years.  Everyone calls his bluff until he finally breaks down in tears and admits its all a myth.  But everyone knew that anyway and nobody was fooled.

 

Pretty soon George Yule is going to have to face the truth about Kingsford. No more fake news. I wonder if there will be tears.

 

Yeah, I wonder how Charlie Allan at the EE is going to help Dod Yule with that one........

 

 

 

[OxfordDon]

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?

 

I thought it wasn't that Kingsford was better than Loirston, but simply that Loirston wasn't an option any more after the part of the area was rezoned and therefore unavailable.

[Edinburghdon]

Anyone remember Seinfeld and 'George' and his imaginary House in the Hamptons?

 

Delusion that he has some fancy place but in reality he has been lying about his finances for years.  Everyone calls his bluff until he finally breaks down in tears and admits its all a myth.  But everyone knew that anyway and nobody was fooled.

 

Pretty soon George Yule is going to have to face the truth about Kingsford. No more fake news. I wonder if there will be tears.

 

Yeah, I wonder how Charlie Allan at the EE is going to help Dod Yule with that one........

 

 

Still intent on adding nothing relevant to this then?

[RicoS321]

I thought it wasn't that Kingsford was better than Loirston, but simply that Loirston wasn't an option any more after the part of the area was rezoned and therefore unavailable.

 

Sorry, I was meaning that there was a greater support for Kingsford with the fans than Loirston, before Loirston was at the canning stage.

 

It was my understanding that Loirston was never not an option, it's just that the club would have had to pay for a piece of land that previously they wouldn't have. I'm not sure if that would have made it cost prohibitive or just that they didn't want to pay for land.

[Garlogie_Granite]

Anyone remember Seinfeld and 'George' and his imaginary House in the Hamptons?

 

Delusion that he has some fancy place but in reality he has been lying about his finances for years.  Everyone calls his bluff until he finally breaks down in tears and admits its all a myth.  But everyone knew that anyway and nobody was fooled.

 

So this analogy is you, and the land you claim the Aberdeen city council have repeatedly offered to AFC for a stadium, correct?

[manc_don]

Sorry, I was meaning that there was a greater support for Kingsford with the fans than Loirston, before Loirston was at the canning stage.

 

It was my understanding that Loirston was never not an option, it's just that the club would have had to pay for a piece of land that previously they wouldn't have. I'm not sure if that would have made it cost prohibitive or just that they didn't want to pay for land.

 

I always suspected that the cost of the land was what made them change to Kingsford.  I was never really against it but I'll confess I don't really know much about either of the sites.  My main reason for support for Kingsford is that in my, and Tom's professional opinion, you cannot develop Pittodrie to the levels that you would be able to elsewhere. This in itself is a hindrance.  My opinions on the design itself are well documented but the principles and what it is trying to achieve are correct and that's why it has my support.  It's a complete waste of time and money going through the whole process again on another site.

 

And 100%AKS - I'd appreciate some actual credible responses to your claims and statements you've made countless times with no substantiation.

[100% Anti Kingsford]

****Newsflash*****

 

*****Newsflash for Garthbogie Gaz and, Manchester Man Edinburgh Don*****

 

ACC / Local Plans / Local Development strategies / Memos long ago identified 'Loriston' and 'Kingslinks' as the preferred sites for a 'football stadium' for 'Aberdeen FC'.

 

In the case of the latter it is next door to the current stadium.

 

That is, as in - here are two preferred sites the council would like you to possibly develop on.

 

The club, however, have chosen to progress with an alternative site as basically they do not want to pay for land especially paying the council.

 

The alternative site (Kingsford) is near on now being another failed project.  Why is this?  This is verging on being a failed project as the club have failed to provide any sort of proper, reasonable transport plan alongside the 'admirable' efforts at a snazzy stadium which are at this stage just a load of computer generates graphics.  In addition Aberdeenshire Council have vetoed it (not a single member of the committee voted in favour) and a host of other consultant committees have called out concerns (including flooding concerns) that the club now have less than 3 months to rectify.

 

George Yule however, is still using local 'press' to hammer home nonsensical messages which can only be described as 'fake news'.

 

In addition a number of other 'consultant committee' reports await filing with the original planning application.  Amongst these are some from central Govt agencies which will almost (again) certainly call into question the validity of the whole project.

 

Hope that clarifies.

 

[manc_don]

****Newsflash*****

 

*****Newsflash for Garthbogie Gaz and, Manchester Man Edinburgh Don*****

 

ACC / Local Plans / Local Development strategies / Memos long ago identified 'Loriston' and 'Kingslinks' as the preferred sites for a 'football stadium' for 'Aberdeen FC'.

 

In the case of the latter it is next door to the current stadium.

 

That is, as in - here are two preferred sites the council would like you to possibly develop on.

 

The club, however, have chosen to progress with an alternative site as basically they do not want to pay for land especially paying the council.

 

The alternative site (Kingsford) is near on now being another failed project.  Why is this?  This is verging on being a failed project as the club have failed to provide any sort of proper, reasonable transport plan alongside the 'admirable' efforts at a snazzy stadium which are at this stage just a load of computer generates graphics.  In addition Aberdeenshire Council have vetoed it (not a single member of the committee voted in favour) and a host of other consultant committees have called out concerns (including flooding concerns) that the club now have less than 3 months to rectify.

 

George Yule however, is still using local 'press' to hammer home nonsensical messages which can only be described as 'fake news'.

 

In addition a number of other 'consultant committee' reports await filing with the original planning application.  Amongst these are some from central Govt agencies which will almost (again) certainly call into question the validity of the whole project.

 

Hope that clarifies.

 

No, it's just a load of words, again.  Where is the evidence that ACC have offered the club land and they have rejected it?  Post links to said memos rather than 'inverted commas'.

 

And FYI, do you think projects, namely stadiums haven't gone ahead because of a flooding risk? No, you'd be wrong. It's called a mitigation strategy, hell, they could even allow the stadium to flood, providing it contained the water.

[100% Anti Kingsford]

In other shock news Madchester Don accuses another poster of using 'just a load of words' on a football forum.

 

Jesus, things aint what they used to be...........

[Edinburghdon]

****Newsflash*****

 

*****Newsflash for Garthbogie Gaz and, Manchester Man Edinburgh Don*****

 

ACC / Local Plans / Local Development strategies / Memos long ago identified 'Loriston' and 'Kingslinks' as the preferred sites for a 'football stadium' for 'Aberdeen FC'.

 

In the case of the latter it is next door to the current stadium.

 

That is, as in - here are two preferred sites the council would like you to possibly develop on.

 

The club, however, have chosen to progress with an alternative site as basically they do not want to pay for land especially paying the council.

 

The alternative site (Kingsford) is near on now being another failed project.  Why is this?  This is verging on being a failed project as the club have failed to provide any sort of proper, reasonable transport plan alongside the 'admirable' efforts at a snazzy stadium which are at this stage just a load of computer generates graphics.  In addition Aberdeenshire Council have vetoed it (not a single member of the committee voted in favour) and a host of other consultant committees have called out concerns (including flooding concerns) that the club now have less than 3 months to rectify.

 

George Yule however, is still using local 'press' to hammer home nonsensical messages which can only be described as 'fake news'.

 

In addition a number of other 'consultant committee' reports await filing with the original planning application.  Amongst these are some from central Govt agencies which will almost (again) certainly call into question the validity of the whole project.

 

Hope that clarifies.

 

I don't think anyone denied loriston and kings links were identified as possible locations... that's not the question being asked of you. What land has the council "offered" the club?

 

What proof do you have that the club pulled out of talks with partners in training facilities purely because they're intent on moving to kingsford?

 

So far nothing...

 

How about leaving people with actual rational arguments to discuss things rather than blathering pish repeatedly to cover the fact you can't accept facts? That'd be nice.

 

Also, Just because someone's said they'd like you to develop somewhere doesn't automatically mean it's suitable either. Why kings links isn't really suitable has been done to death on this thread already. It's getting tiresome...

[Garlogie_Granite]

Mr 100%AKS.

 

As someone *not* from Westhill, nor part of the w.a.n.k.s group apparently, can you explain why, after such a ranting defence of Pittodrie redevelopment, and similarly anti-Kingsford, you're apparently perfectly happy with going back to Loirston?

[manc_don]

In other shock news Madchester Don accuses another poster of using 'just a load of words' on a football forum.

 

Jesus, things aint what they used to be...........

 

It's really not that difficult. You've been asked countless times to back up your statements and every single time you go on the defensive and just press repeat. We are genuinely intrigued because if that is the case, then questions will need to be asked of the club. You can't make statements like that without the basis of fact or it is just lies or fiction.

[Tyrant]

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.

 

 

The first I heard of the club "dying" if we didn't get a new stadium was from you in this thread. You're sure that Milne/Yule actually said that? Can you provide any sort of proof? Genuinely interested.

 

 

[RicoS321]

George Yule however, is still using local 'press' to hammer home nonsensical messages which can only be described as 'fake news'.

 

Why did you put fake news in inverted commas? Are you suggesting it isn't fake news or it is? I'm confused.

[Garlogie_Granite]

The club, however, have chosen to progress with an alternative site as basically they do not want to pay for land especially paying the council.

*****NEWSFLASH****

 

KINGSFORD ISN'T FREE

[100% Anti Kingsford]

 

The first I heard of the club "dying" if we didn't get a new stadium was from you in this thread. You're sure that Milne/Yule actually said that? Can you provide any sort of proof? Genuinely interested.

 

You are genuinely interested are you?

 

“According to Aberdeen’s major shareholder and chairman, Stewart Milne, Pittodrie is now dragging the club back into the mire. He warned this week that Aberdeen must move – and move soon – or else the club will find themselves “in a very serious situation”. June, 2005.

 

“If this bid fails and we can’t move, we face severe consequences for AFC.  The negative impact to the region will be very substantial, and not only does the Club face a very bleak future, we also lose the opportunity to develop football in the region.  The people of the region lose an opportunity to have a much needed world class community facility that not only plays a huge part in health and education, but also in attracting and anchoring people to the region” January 2011.

 

“Aberdeen vice-chairman George Yule has warned the club could go to the wall if the proposed move to a new £50m stadium plan fails”, January 2017.

[Edinburghdon]

You are genuinely interested are you?

 

“According to Aberdeen’s major shareholder and chairman, Stewart Milne, Pittodrie is now dragging the club back into the mire. He warned this week that Aberdeen must move – and move soon – or else the club will find themselves “in a very serious situation”. June, 2005.

 

“If this bid fails and we can’t move, we face severe consequences for AFC.  The negative impact to the region will be very substantial, and not only does the Club face a very bleak future, we also lose the opportunity to develop football in the region.  The people of the region lose an opportunity to have a much needed world class community facility that not only plays a huge part in health and education, but also in attracting and anchoring people to the region” January 2011.

 

“Aberdeen vice-chairman George Yule has warned the club could go to the wall if the proposed move to a new £50m stadium plan fails”, January 2017.

 

At what point in the first two quotes does anyone say the club will die? Nowhere from what I can see.

 

The third one is a headline, if you're genuinely going to use that as an example you could at least use the full quote, not the sensationalist headline.

 

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/aberdeen-could-cease-exist-50m-9723811

 

"He said: “To be honest, unless we move this club into the 21st century with proper facilities, there's a very real danger those fans walking up King Street in the long term may not have a team to support.

 

“The way football is going we are either up there as one of the visionary clubs with good facilities, a successful team, or there's a real danger we become a backwater.”

 

Supporters have watched Hearts and Hibs redevelop their stadiums and have questioned why Aberdeen can not do the same, but Yule explained staying put is not possible.

 

He said: “Pittodrie is landlocked. We're surrounded by houses.

 

“The capital cost of redeveloping Pittodrie needs to be paid somehow. The legacy from the sale of Pittodrie will pay almost half of a new facility.

 

“The playing surface currently does not meet UEFA criteria for European competition. Corporate hospitality at most football clubs is a big deal these days. Ours is wholly inefficient.

 

“We're putting a lot of money in to stand still. I get the memories, I'm from Aberdeen, I've been to the games here over the years. But we'll never drive forward always looking in the rear-view mirror.”

 

Mike Rumbles’ claims have been shot down by the club

The plans have been met with opposition, with Mike Rumbles MSP last week describing the transport strategy as “wholly inadequate".

 

However, the club say the Lib Dems MSP declined an offer to meet with them to discuss his concerns before going public with them.

 

“This transport assessment hasn't been done in isolation,” explained Yule. “This has been done through consultation with Aberdeen city roads, Aberdeenshire roads, the police, and a whole bunch of very qualified engineers whose day job is all about getting traffic moving.

 

“Up and down the length and breadth of this country there are sports grounds moving between 30,000 – 70,000 people on match days really without trauma. It'd be a very poor indictment in Europe's oil capital if we couldn't move around an average of 13,500 people every other week.

 

“It's disappointing, particular as there had been an invitation to the MSPs and MPs in the local area to come to an open briefing with the club.”

 

Another option for the Dons could be to leave Aberdeen altogether and move to the shire, essentially meaning the city would no longer have a senior football club.

 

But this is something Yule wants to avoid and he added: “By virtue of the fact we're looking at a facility of circa 55 acres or such, there is not that real estate in what I would call downtown Aberdeen.

 

“If there were no opportunities for us to find a suitable site within the city, we believe we need to relocate to modern facilities.

 

“We're not doing this because we think it's nice to have, this is a must."

 

Now admittedly he does say that if proper facilities are not found then the long term future of the club is at stake, no denying that... it's hardly a hysterical "if the kingsford plans arent passed the club is dying" though is it?

 

Can you imagine any business being secure in the long term without adequate facilities? Not completely unreasonable to say even if it is probably just a statement to try and pressure those in power towards helping to secure the clubs future.

 

[100% Anti Kingsford]

Getting boring now mate.

 

Milne and Yule have on various occasions stated that the club is going to 'die' if stadiums fails.

 

[Edinburghdon]

Getting boring now mate.

 

Milne and Yule have on various occasions stated that the club is going to 'die' if stadiums fails.

 

Yet you're unable to provide any quote at all from Milne and one from Yule which is nowhere near as strong as you're making out? I wonder why that is?...

 

I'm going to file this along with the other claims you've made (and completely failed to back up with anything apart from your own imagination) in the folder marked "pish".

 

You're right though, you are getting boring. 

 

[Garlogie_Granite]

Getting boring now mate.

 

Milne and Yule have on various occasions stated that the club is going to 'die' if stadiums fails.

You just provided three quotes that didn't back this up. Have you got even one link to back up these "various occasions"?

 

Also, for the n-th time - got some evidence for these places the council have offered for a stadium yet?

[Garlogie_Granite]

An interesting quote below from....well we'll come to that......

 

‘There is no plan B…’.

 

Yule is conveniently forgetting that the club are already on Plan C.  Bellfield, Loirston and now Kingsford.  We have heard this rhetoric all before.  The end of AFC is nigh blah blah blah if the club don’t get a new stadium.  They have been saying that for the past 17 years and they are still going strong.  There’s maybe no Plan B for George as he might get fired if he doesn’t get this one through!  It is clear for anyone with a modicum of sense that what  AFC are doing is simply applying pressure to  the Councillors via the press. 

 

‘There simply aren’t 30 acres of unzoned land available, so we can’t go anywhere else than Kingsford’.

 

He seems to be conveniently overlooking the sites that have been identified in the Local Development Plan – Kings Links and Loirston.  The  club’s unwillingness to separate the training facilities and stadium is the problem, not the availability of land.

 

Now again, I question the legitimacy of 100%AKS. Note the very similar rhetoric to what we've seen here, very similar.

 

Now, maybe, just maybe, 100%AKS isn't Charlie/Heather, but considering the arguments he's spouting here are almost verbatim to the above, and yet he claims to not eveen know the name of the nimby group, well I'll let everyone else decide.

 

Here's who wrote it.... (in white, it's a surprise - click on the line)

http://www.nokingsfordstadium.org.uk/2017/03/29/fact-checking-afcs-george-yule-what-the-evening-express-should-have-done/

 

 

[Tyrant]

You are genuinely interested are you?

 

“According to Aberdeen’s major shareholder and chairman, Stewart Milne, Pittodrie is now dragging the club back into the mire. He warned this week that Aberdeen must move – and move soon – or else the club will find themselves “in a very serious situation”. June, 2005.

 

“If this bid fails and we can’t move, we face severe consequences for AFC.  The negative impact to the region will be very substantial, and not only does the Club face a very bleak future, we also lose the opportunity to develop football in the region.  The people of the region lose an opportunity to have a much needed world class community facility that not only plays a huge part in health and education, but also in attracting and anchoring people to the region” January 2011.

 

“Aberdeen vice-chairman George Yule has warned the club could go to the wall if the proposed move to a new £50m stadium plan fails”, January 2017.

 

Yes. Genuinely interested. So please provide just one direct quote from either man where they state that the club will "die" if we don't move to Kingsford.

 

Just one quote. Please.

[OxfordDon]

Sorry, I was meaning that there was a greater support for Kingsford with the fans than Loirston, before Loirston was at the canning stage.

 

It was my understanding that Loirston was never not an option, it's just that the club would have had to pay for a piece of land that previously they wouldn't have. I'm not sure if that would have made it cost prohibitive or just that they didn't want to pay for land.

 

Aye, that's a fair point.  The answer i think is that the conversation around Kingsford has become massively polarised in both directions compared to Loirston, somewhat to the detriment of actual debate.  It's all gone a bit shouty.