Edinburghdon Posted January 18, 2017 Share Posted January 18, 2017 Land acquisition is a long game, so it wouldn't be unusual for someone with plenty of cash to look for a gain 20+ year gain. However, I think Milne enjoys being AFC chairman and is quite passionate about the club (on the pitch, anyway) and so I don't believe he has the "flats on the grun" motivation. I just think he's blinkered and his skin in the game is making him this way. Pretty much my thoughts on it too. I'm sure it's also been said at various points that the sale of the land and the building of any new facilities will be done openly and above board, without Milne being involved in the selling due to there being a conflict of interests. Almost certain that was the answer at an AGM a while back anyway. So if the "he just wants the land to build shite flats" theory even had a grain of truth in it he's fucked it up big time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dandy Posted January 18, 2017 Share Posted January 18, 2017 What money has he "ploughed" in? How much did he pay for his 28%? Shut the fuck up when you know fuck all. Wow it must be amazing to be in the know like you! Who gave you all the info? The voices in your head? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocket_scientist Posted January 18, 2017 Share Posted January 18, 2017 Wow it must be amazing to be in the know like you! Who gave you all the info? The voices in your head? Like you (presumably), like me, like everyone, we all know shit. If I say something you have an issue with, challenge it. Or you can sit with your thumb up your arse and say fuck all? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garlogie_Granite Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 Garlogie min. I've never had a problem with you before. As you know. Nor will I ever have a problem with you in the future, if we both want the best for AFC. Which I know you want as much as I do. It's ok if we have different experiences and opinions. I just HATE the false rhetoric that surrounds Milne. False shite that nothing human beings buy into. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garlogie_Granite Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 Lib-Dem twat MSP Rumbles has come out against the plans, and is urging refusal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donsdaft Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 :thumbsup: C'mon the Lib Dems Don't worry, it'll go through Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RicoS321 Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 Lib-Dem twat MSP Rumbles has come out against the plans, and is urging refusal. Do you know his reasons for doing so? Care to share them? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garlogie_Granite Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 Traffic. Parking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manc_don Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 Traffic. Parking. Jeez, can he not think of something original, talk about being a sheep. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RicoS321 Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 Jeez, can he not think of something original, talk about being a sheep. Yep, I think the traffic one is a non-issue. To the extent that it's difficult to take him seriously on his other issue, parking, which will be an issue. At least he didn't use the fear of hooliganism approach. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom_widdows Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 Fuck load of public comments on this one. Think the council will regret their current comment system (much easier than some of the other Councils I have to work with) as it is clearly open to abuse People really need to learn how to 'object' to a planning application. Feel sorry for the Planning Officer on this one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 If your average Westhill resident is to be believed, Merkland Road must currently resemble downtown Aleppo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyrant Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 If your average Westhill resident is to be believed, Merkland Road must currently resemble downtown Aleppo. Have a Simmie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeegieRed Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 It's ok if we have different experiences and opinions. Stop telling everyone to "shut the fuck up" then every time they post something you don't agree with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeegieRed Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 I feel its time people started come up with evidence that Pittodrie in its current state is still fit for purpose. Anyone starting out with the consensus of 'its been fine for years so no need for change' will automatically remove themselves from the debate. Very much this. And since you've posted this no-one has answered it either. £25m is nowhere near enough to redevelop Pittodrie and keep it at 20,000 capacity. We maybe could do it for £50m, but have nothing to sell to get us started. Chelsea are having to knock down the "Chelsea village" in order to redevelop Stanford Bridge. I don't know how much of the £500m they are spending is being spent on that, but likely to be a fair chunk. Aberdeen would have to purchase the flats behind the South and Merkland, plus the land, and likely the road running behind the main stand. Only then they could think about building three new stands. Forget Hearts and Hibs, they built stands in the 90s. If Hearts were only thinking of building them stands now they wouldn't be able to do it. We could just forget the Merkland and only build the south and main stands. It would probably still cost more than phase two of the Kingsford project, and I can only imagine what the place would look like when finished. Probably not great. What we would be left with is a more expensive stadium, and one not as good, all so we can stay in an area that is not actually that great in regards to traffic, parking and the close proximity to the North Sea. A redevelopment of Pittodrie, unless flattened and started again, would be marginally better than what we currently have but no-where near as good as what is being proposed at Kingsford. I accept the location of Kingsford perfect, but the costs involved in staying at Pittodrie make it unrealistic. As for the Kingsford plans, I think they are great. An enclosed bowl with corners filled in, TV screens, suppprters bar, fanzone, museum, safe standing. Build some sort of rail or tram link to it (similar to what is being proposed for Glasgow airport from Paisley train station) and job's a good 'un. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CvB Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 To redevelop Pittodrie would also be a logistical nightmare. For all that would need doing, what would the plan be? Shut down one stand at a time to redevelop? How long would that take. I also imagine that the rules around planning approvals concerning infrastructure, accessibility etc have also changed in the years since Pittodrie was built, so would we even be guaranteed that our local council (fuckwits) would approve any major redevelopment of the existing site? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RicoS321 Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 To redevelop Pittodrie would also be a logistical nightmare. For all that would need doing, what would the plan be? Shut down one stand at a time to redevelop? How long would that take. So? It's going to last another hundred years (in theory), a few years of dicking about is a drop in the ocean. We could even share with Utd for a season if really necessary. Do you think the Tims regret using hampden for a year, or should they have moved out of Glasgow to some green belt land that saved away fans coming into the city? You're asking the wrong questions, it really is just a question of whether you think the city centre location is better than Westhill and then you hold the club to account for the rest. I also imagine that the rules around planning approvals concerning infrastructure, accessibility etc have also changed in the years since Pittodrie was built, so would we even be guaranteed that our local council (fuckwits) would approve any major redevelopment of the existing site? I don't think we should make our decision on whether or not to move our club out of its city on an imagined new planning law that will prevent us getting permission on the application we've not yet submitted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CvB Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 . We could even share with Utd for a season if really necessary. Do you think the Tims regret using hampden for a year, or should they have moved out of Glasgow to some green belt land that saved away fans coming into the city? :laughing: You are seriously comparing the tims temporarily moving to a stadium 3.5 miles away in the same city to us hypothetically trying to arrange a ground share with a team 66 miles away in a different city. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeegieRed Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 :laughing: You are seriously comparing the tims temporarily moving to a stadium 3.5 miles away in the same city to us hypothetically trying to arrange a ground share with a team 66 miles away in a different city. He also thinks trying to buy flats off current residents, then buying the land, then getting planning permission, then knocking it down and building a stadium is simply "a bit of dicking around". Even if you think Pittodrie is a better location than Kingsford, staying will be far more expensive, will take far longer, and the end result won't be anywhere near as good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyrant Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 He also thinks trying to buy flats off current residents, then buying the land, then getting planning permission, then knocking it down and building a stadium is simply "a bit of dicking around". Even if you think Pittodrie is a better location than Kingsford, staying will be far more expensive, will take far longer, and the end result won't be anywhere near as good. Buying flats? What would we be doing that for like? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeegieRed Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 Buying flats? What would we be doing that for like? If you want to rebuild the south stand (and it will need rebuilt, going to take more than a new roof), then we can't build it on the current footprint. We'd need to kick the residents out of their flats and knock them down. Same with the Merkland. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obanred Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 He also thinks trying to buy flats off current residents, then buying the land, then getting planning permission, then knocking it down. Is that not a bit of what Liverpool FC are doing or have done ?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RicoS321 Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 If you want to rebuild the south stand (and it will need rebuilt, going to take more than a new roof), then we can't build it on the current footprint. We'd need to kick the residents out of their flats and knock them down. Same with the Merkland. Have you got any evidence to back that up? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RicoS321 Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 :laughing: You are seriously comparing the tims temporarily moving to a stadium 3.5 miles away in the same city to us hypothetically trying to arrange a ground share with a team 66 miles away in a different city. Aye, very good, take the easy bit and ignore the bit you don't have an answer for. Would it seriously make a difference for a season? It was entirely hypothetical too, I don't believe any of our stands would take a year to re-build, but I've no idea, nor do I think we'd need to share, I'm sure it could be worked around like the beach end was. Inverness shared with us and didn't end them. I'm merely suggesting that there a million ways round the issue, and it's very short term (not suggesting it's easy either btw). Certainly not worth moving ground for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elgindon Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 If the trend of recent times has been for locals to move to the Aberdeen suburbs and beyond,and the stadium being located next to the AWPR making easier access for the 50ish% of fans who come from the North,South and West(and for many folks in town),the location doesnt seem such a bad idea to me. And if the sale of Pittodrie generates what? £15m say ?,a significant sum towards the cost of a new build,why would you patch and repair an old building (without that £15m),in an area where a growing population of incomers*, may have no particular allegiance to the Dons Re - walking to the stadium .I,and lots of others winna be walking for a mile along grassy verges to watch a game of football.If the powers that be are stupid enough to not have something in place for this,then theyll pay for it in folks not bothering *Be interesting to know what the demographic is these days of folks in Torry,Seaton and City Centre though. **Had a wee look,55,000 migrants to the city since 2002,around 60% of whom settled in City Centre/East side of city Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.