New stadium thread

[RicoS321]

Stewart Milne

Just what part of this statement does these objectors not understand.

Some are just losing their life savings for nothing.

 

So they should just give up because Stewart Milne - representing the company building the thing they're fighting against - suggests that it might be in vain? Do you think his is an impartial opinion on the matter? Regardless of your opinion on Kingsford, you must surely understand the importance of the process of being able to object in the courts? You'd have to be fucking stupid not to see that one day you could be on the Wanks end of a planning application that means a lot to you. Why is the "impartial" interviewer not asking Stewart Milne to explain the 20 years of hold ups on his side, and what fucking difference an extra few months makes to him, or the 3 month or so delay that happened already in this application because AFC didn't get their shite together. Just let the folk have their legal right as a citizen of the UK and stop the bullshit concern for their life savings*. As for the partisan crap fae dons fans, fucking hell, not everything the club says or does has to be pandered to, as if anyone that disagrees is some sort of enemy. They're very, very capable of getting things wrong, and the more scrutiny they get the better.

 

 

*Aye, savings are weird like DD.

 

 

[Garlogie_Granite]

Life savings

 

 

This is a concept which has always been alien to me.

 

Do you all have savings?

 

 

If I add up whats in my pooch versus what I owe then fuck sake!

 

 

On the other hand

 

 

I've brought up 3 kids and I'm away to open another can of beer.

 

 

It's not about savings, it's about cash flow.

Yes I do, I'm terrified of being an old drooler not able to go out cos I've nae sillar in ma pooch

[donsdaft]

That'll give you an extra couple of weeks in the care home as a paying customer

[Lencarl]

Life savings

 

 

This is a concept which has always been alien to me.

 

Do you all have savings?

 

 

If I add up whats in my pooch versus what I owe then fuck sake!

 

 

On the other hand

 

 

I've brought up 3 kids and I'm away to open another can of beer.

 

 

It's not about savings, it's about cash flow.

 

One should always have savings for a rainy day donsdaft and there are lot of them in Aberdeen.

[donsdaft]

Which is why I’m sitting on a park bench in Budapest, enjoying the sunshine.

[Barcosente]

Currently, I'm in Valencia visiting daughter number 2 and her husband and 3 of my grandchildren

I have been here quite a few times before but never visited the Mestalla till now. I was pretty impressed i have to say looking at the capacity of just under 50,000 and the history of the club.

 

The thing that struck me was that there are a few striking similarities between them and Aberdeen.

 

Firstly, the current stadium is also slap bang on the middle of a neighbourhood, completely surrounded by housing with no prospect of expanding the footprint of the stadium. The only ways are down or up.

 

Secondly, they have plans to move to new stadium on the outskirts of the city, indeed they started building this glorious new cathedral of football back in 2006 with a 70,000+ capacity but have ran out of cash twice now and as a result.

Now plans have been revised by the architects for a third time with reduced capacity of approx 55,000 being quoted.

 

Valencia have so far spent around 150 million euros and have an empty unfinished shell of a stadium which it's estimated that they'll need to find around another 100 - 150 million euros to complete, with the banks taking control of the current ground in the shape of a guarantee.

Work is yet to resume on the new stadium with a date being mentioned of season 20/21 as feasable.

The guy who did the stadium tour today has said he expects another 3 years on top of this.

 

Why do I mention this?

Because the similarities between the two sides are close enough to make some  comparisons.

Neither team is expected to win the league any time soon with cup competition being the most realistic avenue to success.

Both are working cities, albeit with 2 professional clubs here but 3 times + the population.

 

The stadium issue to me is a warning though.

Valencia C.F. Do not have enough cash to finish the project as it stands.

The question that keeps running through my mind and has done from the start, is where is 50 million cash coming from to pay for the glowing Stewart Milne epitaph that would be A.F.C. new home outside the city proper coming from?

 

Valencia last won a trophy in 2008 and i can't help but think that there is a link between lack of success and the millstone round the club's neck of the new stadium.

Obviously there are comparisons that can't be drawn between the 2 sides, such as the incomparable richness of the teams and the fact that Valencia has a foreign owner.

Coupled with the fortunes still being ploughed into La Liga and lack of in Scottish football, then there are major differences, but enough similarities at the same time to compare.

 

Does anyone have any idea where the cash for the building of the Stewart Milne Dome is coming from, or has that question been answered and I missed it? If anyone has the answer to this, then please do tell.

 

By the way, Valencia sucks. Not a buttery with cheese spread to be found

[tom_widdows]

Given the bullshit that has gone down in Spain's economy and their construction industry I would not rush to compare it to whats going on Westhill way.

 

The mismanagement of funds in Valencia's stadium debacle reeks of corruption and/or absolute incompitence to me (Edinburgh Trams eat your heart out).

 

Also the price of a 70000 seater stadium dwarfs that of a 20000 seater stadium especially when you get Arup involved and start messing around with silly claddings, wooden interiors and tensile canopy roofs.

 

[Dunty]

The only lesson to be learned is don't start building your stadium until the money is in place.

 

 

[Barcosente]

I don't think it's a direct comparison so much with what has happened here in Valencia with what is happening back in not so sunny Aberdeen as to the implications of committing to a new stadium that haven't, to my knowledge been publicly costed.

 

Everyone knows how the Spanish economy has tanked and that building projects have been out on hold as a result. That much is obvious if you look around.

 

There are similarities to be drawn between our club and Valencia however.

 

I still have yet to see an answer as to where Aberdeen FC are getting the 50 million pounds from to find a new stadium.

Does anyone actually know this?

 

Ultimately, and to all our concern, will this unfunded stadium.... to the best of anyone's knowledge, stop or in any way hinder investment in the squad and\or playing staff?

 

I think we could all agree that we'd be happy with the Team winning trophies in a crap Pittodrie than a crap team losing in the second or third tier in fantastic stadium?

 

There are plenty of instances of teams suffering because of investment in stadia to the detriment of the playing squads.

 

Transparency in where the money for the new stadium is coming from would be a start.

 

Valencia sure as he'll don't know.

[rocket_scientist]

I asked Stewrat Milne this very question at the last AGM I bothered attending, in 2008.

 

I started by having a go at Miller and Calderwood and their repetitive claims that we all had unrealistic expectations. I finished by asking the chairman how realistic his expectations were that we could afford a new stadium. During our exchange, I drew an admission that a rights issue would be required to meet the shortfall so those of us who go fuck you, I'm not giving you more of my money for you to waste, our shareholding will be further diluted from the fuck all he's made our original investments worth.

 

The whole thing stinks and whilst "the product" has been suffering for the whole quarter century that he's been involved, I don't expect any change in fortunes on the pitch any decade soon... because it's NEVER been his agenda nor his focus.

[Dunty]

I don't think it's a direct comparison so much with what has happened here in Valencia with what is happening back in not so sunny Aberdeen as to the implications of committing to a new stadium that haven't, to my knowledge been publicly costed.

 

Everyone knows how the Spanish economy has tanked and that building projects have been out on hold as a result. That much is obvious if you look around.

 

There are similarities to be drawn between our club and Valencia however.

 

I still have yet to see an answer as to where Aberdeen FC are getting the 50 million pounds from to find a new stadium.

Does anyone actually know this?

 

Ultimately, and to all our concern, will this unfunded stadium.... to the best of anyone's knowledge, stop or in any way hinder investment in the squad and\or playing staff?

 

I think we could all agree that we'd be happy with the Team winning trophies in a crap Pittodrie than a crap team losing in the second or third tier in fantastic stadium?

 

There are plenty of instances of teams suffering because of investment in stadia to the detriment of the playing squads.

 

Transparency in where the money for the new stadium is coming from would be a start.

 

Valencia sure as he'll don't know.

 

Without sounding like I'm part of the club's PR, Aberdeen's plan here is to invest heavily in a state of the art facility, with a modern stadium that is able to bring in income seven days a week, increase attendances, coupled with a training ground, all geared towards making Aberdeen a UEFA top 100 club.

 

You're essentially saying that Aberdeen shouldn't bother trying to be ambitious and instead should play the "safe" option of doing nothing, because there's some risk attached.

 

They can't do nothing. Pittodrie is a wreck, the cost of maintaining it is increasing year on year, we have no training ground, and despite some success on the pitch our crowds have fallen behind Hearts and Hibs - it's no coincidence they are playing in much more modern stadiums than we are.

 

Aberdeen are not going to begin building the stadium until they have the money in place. It's not going to be another Valencia situation.

 

As for "no-one knows where the money is coming from" - the club have said time and time again it will be from the sale of Pittodrie, naming rights, share issue, and private investment. The latter part they clearly can't reveal while they are in negotiations. They believe they can raise £43m, with the rest as a mortgage. If they can't raise it, they're not going to start building the stadium regardless, so there really is nothing to worry about.

[TheDeeDon]

Without sounding like I'm part of the club's PR, Aberdeen's plan here is to invest heavily in a state of the art facility, with a modern stadium that is able to bring in income seven days a week, increase attendances, coupled with a training ground, all geared towards making Aberdeen a UEFA top 100 club.

 

You're essentially saying that Aberdeen shouldn't bother trying to be ambitious and instead should play the "safe" option of doing nothing, because there's some risk attached.

 

They can't do nothing. Pittodrie is a wreck, the cost of maintaining it is increasing year on year, we have no training ground, and despite some success on the pitch our crowds have fallen behind Hearts and Hibs - it's no coincidence they are playing in much more modern stadiums than we are.

 

Aberdeen are not going to begin building the stadium until they have the money in place. It's not going to be another Valencia situation.

 

As for "no-one knows where the money is coming from" - the club have said time and time again it will be from the sale of Pittodrie, naming rights, share issue, and private investment. The latter part they clearly can't reveal while they are in negotiations. They believe they can raise £43m, with the rest as a mortgage. If they can't raise it, they're not going to start building the stadium regardless, so there really is nothing to worry about.

 

You do sound like the clubs PR machine. I don't think the poster you responded too did anything bar ask some legitimate questions about the costing of the stadium and compared it to events at a club close to where he stays.

 

Pittodrie is a wreck because of decades of gross mismanagement by the same chairman who we are expected to trust to build this white elephant, sorry new stadium.

 

Trust the weasel faced cunt and his acolytes at your peril, the man is a born shyster.

 

 

[rocket_scientist]

You do sound like the clubs PR machine.

 

Much as I agree with your suspicions of Milne and the obvious neglect of Pittodrie, I don't agree with your interpretation of his post.

 

He hit the nail on the head: -

 

it will be from the sale of Pittodrie, naming rights, share issue, and private investment

 

The biggest problem I have is the share issue. I also don't understand how private investment would suddenly magically appear when for the history of the club and in particular the last 45 years once oil hit Aberdeen, we failed to attract any significant injection.

 

As I said, the whole thinks stinks and has always stank. It is the agenda of one man, ably supported and flanked by sycophants. Football was never the agenda and karma will dictate that the venture will not succeed.

 

Having attended 3 games in the Scottish Championship, Leagues 1 and 2 in 15 days last month, I was alarmed at the state of Scottish football. I knew the overall standard was going backwards in the top division - for many contributory reasons - but I didn't expect to see teams winning leagues that included footballers who were no better than top amateurs and juniors from 30 and 40 years ago. The infrastructures are falling apart, kids aren't playing the game in anything other than a fraction of what they did last century and therefore the timing of this new stadia investment is questionable. He's already done a great job of alienating generations of our potential fanbase and many of our missing thousands won't be back just because Aberdeen play at Westhill.

 

[Barcosente]

"There really is nothing to worry about"

Are you sure your last name isn't Milne? @Dunty.

 

There is everything to worry about here.

It is a massive gamble on behalf of the club, and let's not forget that the decision to build this gleaming new ground and facilities, is on behalf of the club.

That means you, me and all of the posters on this site have vested interests in seeing this project work.

It would be nice to see the whole thing work out nicely and for the Team to have state of the art facilities and a packed out ground (assuming you can park your car anywhere near Westhill)

 

Saying naming rights, share issue and private investment is going to pay for the shortfall is like me saying that my winnings from the 2.20 at Kempton Park is going to pay for what I eat tonight. It's a gamble that may or may not come off.

The word "mortgage" makes me shudder. That word means that the club would have to sacrifice some income to pay it.

It also means that there is much less money available to spend on the thing that matters to us most and is essentially why we support the club, namely good players, both bought and home raised.

 

 

I'm sure they said the same thing back in 2006 here in Valencia when they broke ground for the "New Mestalla".

It looks fantastic btw. It even has a metro stop near by and an underground car park beneath the stadium. Thinking out of the box I'd say there.

 

As alluded to, I am not saying "do nothing because it's the safer option"

It is a dangerous option to go cack handed into a project that the money is not on the table for.

Plenty of examples of this scenario are around that have shown clubs getting into financial difficulties because of improperly financed stadium building/improvements including the one here in Valencia which almost bankrupted the club and pretty much forced the club into foreign ownership, which sticks in the throats of the locals.

 

We know that Pittodrie is falling apart and needs replacing or upgraded. I moved to Aberdeen for work in 1967 and have supported the Dons ever since so it's a little insulting for anyone to tell me the obvious.

 

My question still stands. Where is the money coming from?

All the answers i have seen to this point have been vague at best and non committal at worst.

Where has the so called private investment been the last 20 years or so?

If Mr Milne Wants this so badly, why doesn't he and his chums pay for it themselves?

No use defending him or his cohorts in this. The game is now afoot and proper answers are required to bring doubters like me and many others in board.

Too much blind faith is being placed on an outside bet here.

 

Put a pound on the favourite on the Kempton 2.20. It may or may not pay for your meal tonight.

In the absence of a win, there will always be stale bread to eat.

[Garlogie_Granite]

 

 

Saying naming rights, share issue and private investment is going to pay for the shortfall is like me saying that my winnings from the 2.20 at Kempton Park is going to pay for what I eat tonight. It's a gamble that may or may not come off.[1]

 

The word "mortgage" makes me shudder. That word means that the club would have to sacrifice some income to pay it.[2]

 

It also means that there is much less money available to spend on the thing that matters to us most and is essentially why we support the club, namely good players, both bought and home raised.[3]

1. Nothing like the same. One is trying to do something for which you mostly control, the other you have no control at all over.

 

2. Which the club says including maintenance, will be less than keeping Pittodrie going now does.

 

3. *More* money to spend on things that matter, see [2]

 

 

We are nothing like Valencia, or Spain.  There is no club in Britain got into trouble due to building a new ground.

[RicoS321]

We are nothing like Valencia, or Spain.  There is no club in Britain got into trouble due to building a new ground.

 

Depends on what you mean by "got into trouble". Coventry being a reasonable example. However, using "Britain" is stupid. Scottish fitba has as many similarities with Spanish as it does Spain. Backing for new stadia in England is generally premised on the fact that they can push for the EPL on the back of it, which offers huge returns on investment. There is nowhere that Aberdeen investors can go to get that return.

 

It's those unknown investors that are the issue here. They haven't been here since Milne arrived, not in any great number (investment) anyway. Indeed the recent DNA investors (idiots!) have now put in as much money as some of the recent board appointees with zero shares/rights in return. With the DNA proposal, we appear to be diluting the potential returns that any rights issue might raise too, so it seems there is a direct conflict here between on the park investment (DNA) and stadium investment (share issue).

 

That leaves us with the question: what it's in it for them? We're talking big investment here, naming rights aside, for zero return. It could be argued that WM Donald could see a return on their initial £3M investment by getting the construction job on the stadium or the pittodrie flats, so there is tangible benefit for them if that were the case. Who else, and what are we giving them in return? I don't believe Milne does something for nothing - indeed, as far as I'm aware, his/SMGs preference shares are payable upon sale of Pittodrie, meaning he could walk away evens - and I don't believe he'd expect others too either. We've seen the debt added to Man Utd for example, or the various spivs getting their tuppence worth at the hun. There must be some similar opportunity at AFC. Watch those flats carefully, watch the stadium project, and follow the money.  I expect the fans - through whatever mechanism is available - will end up paying for any investment over time. We are the ones that will pay for this eventually. Yet we didn't get a choice.

 

If you told Stewarty 25 years ago that the dons would be playing in Westhill and it wouldn't have cost him a penny he'd have told you that you were a lunatic.

[Barcosente]

1. Nothing like the same. One is trying to do something for which you mostly control, the other you have no control at all over.

 

2. Which the club says including maintenance, will be less than keeping Pittodrie going now does.

 

3. *More* money to spend on things that matter, see [2]

 

 

We are nothing like Valencia, or Spain.  There is no club in Britain got into trouble due to building a new ground.

 

Where is the control over something that you cannot show the money available to spend?

At the moment no one has the answer to give As to where the cold hard cash is coming from to complete the stadium and facilities.

Therefore, until this is made clear, we simply do not know the level of control the club has in managing this debt.

 

I may be in my 70's now but I am not some doddery old fool who doesn't understand the concept of mortgage management.

Depending on how much the shortfall is then we don't know how much this will be.

The club may have stayed that this will be less than current ground maintainence,but until they tell us where the money is coming from it is all just a sales pitch by the powers that be at the club.

It could be more than the current ground maintainence in this case of the shortfall or as yet unnamed investors decide this isn't for them.

 

In the second scenario with investors shortfall, this will mean less to spend on developing a successful team. This is obvious.

 

Of course Aberdeen are nothing like Valencia or Spain, and I have only used this example because I am here visiting my family and have been able to draw some valid comparisons between the two teams situations.

 

Plenty clubs have gone into financial dire straights as a result of having had to improve there stadia...Coventry as previously mentioned are one, Wolverhampton Wanderers almost famously went down the swanny because of building 1 stand.

Recently, clubs being promoted to the top league in Scotland had to meet minimum criteria to gain admission with Dundee, Inverness, Ross County and Falkirk

All shelling out to gain admittance to the top table, all of whom admitted at the time that it would impact on player recruitment.

Falkirk's old ground and it's derelict state kept Aberdeen in the top league.

There are plenty other examples of the likes of Falkirk, Hamilton, St mirren all having shiny new Lego stadia that saved their clubs from going under but only because supermarkets bought the old grounds.

 

Aberdeen themselves put our club heavily into debt building The Richard Donald stand and it's no coincidence that The crap we've had to watch in a lot of The intervening years has been because there has been no cash as a result

 

The last part of that last paragraph is an argument FOR moving.

 

For the record, I have never said no to new stadium. Sentimentally, I am attached to Pittodrie but see the reasoning behind a new ground.

I cannot jump aboard the new stadium "glee club" though, without seeing concrete answers as to where the cash is coming from.

 

More transparency is needed in this respect.

I know a lot of you guys are fully on-board with this, but an awful lot of us need more answers.

Provide these, then we can judge for ourselves instead of wandering like zombies into a potential catastrophe for OUR club.

 

It is not all fantastic.

The famous movie quite once said " Show me the money"

Time to show the fans where the money is.

 

[manc_don]

Depends on what you mean by "got into trouble". Coventry being a reasonable example.

 

Hartlepool united as well no?  Or one of those teams down that way built a stadium that they could never fill.  Believe that was before the crazy sky money came in?

[Jute]

Hartlepool united as well no?  Or one of those teams down that way built a stadium that they could never fill.  Believe that was before the crazy sky money came in?

 

Airdrie up here as well. New stadium sank them.

[tom_widdows]

Plenty clubs have gone into financial dire straights as a result of having had to improve there stadia...Coventry as previously mentioned are one, Wolverhampton Wanderers almost famously went down the swanny because of building 1 stand.

Recently, clubs being promoted to the top league in Scotland had to meet minimum criteria to gain admission with Dundee, Inverness, Ross County and Falkirk

All shelling out to gain admittance to the top table, all of whom admitted at the time that it would impact on player recruitment.

Falkirk's old ground and it's derelict state kept Aberdeen in the top league.

There are plenty other examples of the likes of Falkirk, Hamilton, St mirren all having shiny new Lego stadia that saved their clubs from going under but only because supermarkets bought the old grounds.

 

Wolves redevelopments were in effect forced upon them due to new safety standards brought in firstly after the Ibrox disaster and then again following Bradford & Hillsbrough.

The first stand may have brought them to their knees but so did poor attendances, bad performances and I would not be surprised if financial corruption had a part to play.

 

The Ricoh is a disaster and had England not gone for the 2006 world cup I think it would have been a different story especially given Coventry were relegated 4 years before construction started. Moving from a 24000 seat stadium to a 32500 seat stadium when you are still paying off premiership contracts but not getting Man United/ Arsenal & co turning up I reckon their board got a major shock when they found out the core fan base wasn't that big. There was a also a fairly big fuck up in the construction/ design which as I understand it screwed up the safety certificate form the start.

 

As for scotland I must correct you and also chastise you for pedalling the west coast media myth about Falkirk's stadium keeping the dons in the top league.

When the Dons fininshed bottom back in 1999-2000 there was no automatic relegation from the SPL due to league expansion. The top 2 from division 1 were promoted (St Mirren & Dunfermline) and the 3rd placed team went into a playoff with the team who finished 10th in the spl. Brockville did not meet the stadium criteria so the playoff with the Dons was cancelled.

HOWEVER Brockville kept motherwell in the SPL in 2003 as Falkirk's new stadium was not ready so they had to groundshare at Ochil view the following season meaning there was no relegation at all.

 

Essentially GG's statment's statment that no club in britain got into trouble building a new ground is a bit generic as it is never that straight forward

The spectre of what happened to Darlington springs to mind but my understanding of that was not so much the stadium but more the absolute fuckwittery of how their board's plan to turn a small north eastern club with an average attendance of 7000 into premiership regulars by building them a new stadium 3 times the size of their old ground on the cheap and with extremely poor planning. Doesnt help when your chairman goes bankrupt and gets sent down for 3 years for tax evasion.

 

I've recently heard someone saying they would rather stay are a delapitated pittodrie and more money be put into the playing squad. This statement is pissing me off as it does not actually engage in the debate about how the stadium issues are resolved. Its classic head in the sand thinking

I stupidly put together a rough sketch of how pittodrie could be redeveloped under current regulations and came up with the 12-13k figure. This was promptly stuck on Twitter by a pro kingsford group and met with comments along the lines of 'that prick has no imagination' as if the laws of physics do not apply to the area around merkland road.

 

Pittodrie is a shithole but it can be redeveloped all be it to a much reduced capacity. This will be an expensive and time consuming process and given safety regs get stricter it will leave pretty much no room for future expansion.

If the club can find a way to rework the business model on only having 13000 seats (of which 9000-10000 are snapped up as season tickets) then it could be a goer but it seriously restricts their revenue stream. If 90% of the seats are with season ticket holders you could end up with a half empty ground when they can't make it or get pissed off and turn their backs. Reduced food & merchandising sales follows etc.

Then of course there is still the training facilities issue.

 

Alternatively there is the new stadium (slightly smaller capacity) which is flawed at the moment but as with lots of large developments I reckon it will take about 3 years and the teething issues will have been resolved.

 

For me something has to be done and its either reduced capacity (and debt), or new stadium (and debt).

Simply doing nothing is not an option.

 

 

 

[Dunty]

As for scotland I must correct you and also chastise you for pedalling the west coast media myth about Falkirk's stadium keeping the dons in the top league.

When the Dons fininshed bottom back in 1999-2000 there was no automatic relegation from the SPL due to league expansion. The top 2 from division 1 were promoted (St Mirren & Dunfermline) and the 3rd placed team went into a playoff with the team who finished 10th in the spl. Brockville did not meet the stadium criteria so the playoff with the Dons was cancelled.

HOWEVER Brockville kept motherwell in the SPL in 2003 as Falkirk's new stadium was not ready so they had to groundshare at Ochil view the following season meaning there was no relegation at all.

 

Just one small correction. Had Falkirk's stadium been up to standard, it would have been a three-way playoff between Aberdeen, Dunfermline and Falkirk, with the top two teams in the round robin going into the top flight.

[manc_don]

That’s it, it was Darlington not Hartlepool 

 

I get the point that some are saying he’s (SM) has allowed this situation to happen, but I can’t help but feel that they’re ignoring the fact that we had no fucking money up until recently. Even then, we don’t have any money, not really. All well and good saying we should have maintained pittodrie etc but the costs would have spiraled. I hate the location of the new stadium, but as you say tom, something needs to happen. The morons on twitter and another rival board  need to accept you can’t just build whatever you want.. There are reasons for regulations. Unfortunately there are some that refuse to listen despite all the evidence being put in front of them.

 

Fans are what make a stadium, not where it is, not what it is but our support is split.  whatever happens they need to get behind it. Given the home support is shite, I doubt it’ll happen. God forbid something nice getting built in Aberdeen 

[donsdaft]

I can't for the life of me understand the " all get behind it" attitude.

 

Why on earth would I want to support an idea which is going to destroy Aberdeen Football Club and create Westhill United?

[RicoS321]

The morons on twitter and another rival board  need to accept you can’t just build whatever you want.. There are reasons for regulations. Unfortunately there are some that refuse to listen despite all the evidence being put in front of them.

 

People do understand that. The issue is that those barriers have not been tested. There is also a regulation that says that you can't build on green belt land, yet that was tested via application at Kingsford and successfully passed. Your suggestion, therefore, that "all the evidence being [has been] put in front of them" is - as you know - completely false. The closest I've had to evidence as a 20+ year season ticket holder is a drawing fae TW on here. I've not seen a 12,000 seater stadium drawing that show the sun/daylight trajectories, the detailed drawings, the detailed reasons as to why the giant road behind the main stand cannot be reduced in size to accommodate a larger stand (yet can be completely removed to build the planned flats). Nothing at all has been produced that could possibly ever be classed as evidence, we've only ever been told to trust the club. Most importantly - and as one of the councilors at the planning consultation for Kingsford pointed out - they have never brought forward a plan to the council that could be tested. That's because - and this is the only reason - the club do not want to, and have never wanted to, stay at Pittodrie. That's not conspiracy theory or even criticism, that's just a statement of fact. Feel free to challenge any individual point I've made here.

 

Fans are what make a stadium, not where it is, not what it is but our support is split.  whatever happens they need to get behind it. Given the home support is shite, I doubt it’ll happen. God forbid something nice getting built in Aberdeen 

 

Except that's bollocks. Of course it matters where it is. If it's difficult to get to and in an non-enjoyable location then folk won't go. People like me will go every week, because fitba is what we enjoy doing, but we've only got - at best - 10K of those folks. The happy-clapping bullshit of group thinking: "they need to get behind it" will not persuade the occasional fans to turn out 3-5 years after its built if the location is shite. We don't "need to get behind it", we need people to think for themselves and evaluate the proposition based on the evidence. This is no different to saying "Scottish football needs Rangers". People don't need to be told what to think, it's fucking insulting and exactly the sort of attitude that results in the biggest unfairness we see in society as a whole today. If the club build a shite stadium in a shite location, then the club goes the way of the hun and that's the way it should be. The club is not more important than its fans, and the decision to exclude them from this entire process is a dangerous one.

[Kowalski]

Why on earth would I want to support an idea which is going to destroy Aberdeen Football Club and create Westhill United?

 

Because it’ll do neither.