New stadium thread

[RicoS321]

Because it’ll do neither.

 

Maybe, but if no that's what donsdaft believes then the notion that he should blindly "get behind it" is surely a ridiculous one?

[Guest kiriakovisthenewstrachan]

If it's difficult to get to and in an non-enjoyable location then folk won't go.

 

I don't get this argument at all.

 

A lot of Dons supporters come from outside the city and travel an hour plus to get there on a match day.  You just have to look at the number of cars parked along the beach at a home game.  Can't see that the location is going to put people off going.  For every person who lives smack bang in the centre city and can't be arsed to go there will be another fan who suddenly finds himself 20 minutes closer to the stadium than he used to be and will go instead.

 

Bloody hell we get thousands of fans going to away games but can't make it ALL the way to Westhill, it's hardly on the other side of the country.

[RicoS321]

I don't get this argument at all.

 

Clearly, because that wasn't my argument, hence the "if".

[Ten Caat]

Coming from more than 100 miles away and being adjacent to the AWPR will certainly make my (admittedly none too frequent) jaunts up north far easier and will probably mean I make the effort a couple more times a season.

 

Foe every supporter who finds it difficult to get to there will be another who finds it much easier. It is pointless bleating on about it anymore. The stadium will be built regardless of the WANKS.

[donsdaft]

I don't believe that the stadium will ever be built, well I certainly hope not.

 

Aberdeen Football Club should play in Aberdeen.

 

Not some souless backwater like Westhill.

 

 

Actually, Aberdeen Football Club should play at Pittodrie.

[RicoS321]

The stadium will be built regardless of the WANKS.

 

Nobody gives a fuck about the WANKS, the question was raised about financing though, and some incorrect statements raised. Given it's a forum, surely worth discussing? What sort of mortgage/debt level do you think would be acceptable for the new stadium for example? If we can't get investment for £20M of the stadium cost, should we land ourselves with a £20M mortgage while the chairman is repaid his debts and walks away (this is an example, not my understanding)? Who do you think are the investors, and what will they get in return that they couldn't have had over the last 25 years where they didn't choose to invest?

[baggy89]

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?

 

OOOfft! dinna let them hear you say that! It was Darlington, and the safe cracker, George Reynolds.

 

Seating built for Hobbits but had marble and gold taps etc. in the bogs.  25000 seats for a club with average attendances of about a tenth of that...

 

Didn't the fans also stop going because the stadium was a vanity project, him and his wife were arrogant shits who put no money into that actual fitba and ended up bankrupting the club? I seem to remember Reynolds offering advice to the FA over New Wembley, even.

 

They started again playing at a local rugby ground if I remember.

[Ten Caat]

I don't believe that the stadium will ever be built, well I certainly hope not.

 

Aberdeen Football Club should play in Aberdeen.

 

Not some souless backwater like Westhill.

 

 

Actually, Aberdeen Football Club should play at Pittodrie.

 

Will you stop supporting the club when it takes place?

[tom_widdows]

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).

 

 

Because the transport/ access infrastructure for a 20000 seater stadium is completely different to that required for a residential development.

 

A residential development is highly unlikely to suddenly have 20000 turn up therefore does not have issues such as emergency evacuations, crowd control, commercial servicing. Soon as the 20000 seater stadium is removed that entire area can be remodelled as the majority use has changed.

 

I have mentioned this several times and yet it always seems to fall on deaf ears.

 

Just also want to add (again) the residential proposal for the pittodrie site only has 'outline' planning consent. If you are not familiar with this term it basically means the council have agreed to the idea of x number of flats/ houses being built on the site. It is actually possible to get outline planning consent by simply submitting an application form with a short general description, appropriate fee and an ordinance survey plan with a redline around the site. The 3d scheme is an added bonus designed to tempt prospective developers.

Anyone who purchases the site will have to go for a full detailed planning application in which the subject of modifying existing roads will be discussed and the planners could say 'leave pittodrie street alone'. Then the building control team will get their hands on it.

[Barcosente]

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.

 

Thanks Tom and others for the great post  and great memory!

 

Good finds there, and a warning for any club thinking about putting themselves into debt to get a new stadium.

 

The long and short of this issue is that the club have to do something one way or another.

 

I am all for moving if the club are transparent and tell the fans how it is going to be funded.

Some of this has been made public, but it's the parts that haven't been made public that concern me and should concern every supporter of Aberdeen F.C.

 

The other concern I have is the location and how we get thousands of fans in and out the ground on matchday.

Currently, a lot of fans park up in and around Pittodrie, beach area etc with some also using official car parks.

1200 car park spaces I believe is quoted for the new ground and those are to be snapped up by season ticket holders, meaning that we shall have to find parking somewhere in Westhill area or rely on currently unreliable transport.

 

Other concerns on here already raised are the watering down of the matchday experience.

A lot of fans I know enjoy a beer and or lunch with friends and leave the city centre to get to the ground in time for kickoff.

It's a ritual at the majority of clubs all over the UK and even abroad.

The club will need to address those concerns to make sure that some fans don't just look at there watch at 2.30 or half an hour before which ever kick off time is deemed by TV, and shrug their shoulders and don't bother going....which I guarantee will be the case for some

 

It's good that a lot of fans are on board with this new stadium, but being blind about the pitfalls and debt the club will have to take on is not on.

 

 

 

[donsdaft]

Will you stop supporting the club when it takes place?

 

 

 

I hope not but it's a real possibility.

[Kowalski]

 

 

I hope not but it's a real possibility.

 

See ya 

[donsdaft]

Well, it's a shame, but I'm glad I widnae be a miss.

[manc_don]

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.

 

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.

 

Sorry, read this last night but didn't have a chance to reply.  I know you know I wasn't aiming at anyone here as we've generally had some good debate on this board and it's raised plenty of valid questions.  You are only playing devils advocate and I appreciate that.  My argument is with others elsewhere and with the fact that someone in the profession has taken their time, more importantly a fan, to draw up and test the site should be enough evidence alone.  Especially given that they've got no contractual link to the club. Not someone who has sketchup and thinks they can adapt / copy a stadium from elsewhere in the world (as some of the examples I've seen).  I know that some football crowds aren't known for their intelligence but fuck me, it's actually been drawn out to standards. Having had him labelled as unimaginative by some folk was ridiculous. We all know footprint of the site at Pittodrie is what is limiting.  We've missed opportunities over the years.  The road can definitely be moved, it would take time and some houses would need to be bought up and I'd imagine that these are all unknowns for the club to deal with. business never likes these, let alone when they're trying to build something.  Don't really think the club owe the council anything regarding the Pittodrie site.

 

I don't doubt that the club have probably never wanted to stay, probably because they knew they'd get a better deal in terms of land availability and size. The argument that they've let this happen to Pittodrie is probably partly true, I say partly because refurbishing isn't cheap either and we've been skint for so long so it's not like we had the opportunity to do it before. Unfortunately we are where we are, and something needs to be done far sooner rather than later.  We can all disagree with the strategy they have adopted but christ, if we really feel that strongly about it, protest about it rather than moan on their facebook posts or twitter. Do something about it.

 

The infrastructure will come along with the development, the motorway is being built.  It's far from an ideal inner city location, it's a shite one I definitely agree, but it will be easier for some to get to.  I'd way prefer to have a train station nearby as I hate the idea of having to rely on buses but we've little choice at the moment.  I have no doubt that businesses will open up around the area to cater to fans needs.  People adapt, they always do.

 

I don't expect to convince people, it's not my job to and I believe the battle lines have been drawn.  This is far from my ideal scenario.  I think Tom put it quite succinctly, we have to do something, nothing is not an option. It is impossible to please everyone, let alone Aberdeen fans.

 

Tom / Baggy, you're right, it was darlo I was thinking of, knew it was a shite north east English town

[donsdaft]

Still no reason to "get behind" something that you hate the idea of.

 

It's not even as if they will build anything good, it'll be cheap modern shite in a shite shite location.

 

 

In case I haven't made myself clear, I think it's shite.

[manc_don]

Still no reason to "get behind" something that you hate the idea of.

 

It's not even as if they will build anything good, it'll be cheap modern shite in a shite shite location.

 

 

In case I haven't made myself clear, I think it's shite.

 

But what if, what if it isn't cheap shite?  What if it's actually a decent stadium?

[donsdaft]

It'll still be in Westhill

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It'll be cheap shite

[Jute]

But what if, what if it isn't cheap shite?  What if it's actually a decent stadium?

 

Given our track record and this site is cheapest option I would say it’s a fair bet that stadium will be a soulless cheap legoland.

[tom_widdows]

Stage 1 Building warrant for Phase 1 was registered on 25th April

 

STAGED WARRANT: Kingsford Phase 1 - Proposed Community and Sports Facilities, Football Academy, (comprising outdoor pitches, pavilion, ancillary buildings), formation of access roads, parking and associated landscaping and engineering works. STAGE 1: Foundations Drainage & Superstructure (excluding timber kit)

Value of work: £3,300,000.00

 

 

Be interested to see if this one jumps the queue at the Council Building Control Office

 

[Dunty]

 

 

I hope not but it's a real possibility.

 

Can I ask what will stop you supporting the club?

 

Surely the location is irrelevant? When they're playing away from home do you refuse to support them?

[donsdaft]

I take the word support literally.

 

I don't support the club by paying to get into Ibrox.

 

 

I'll never stop being a Dons fan.

[Dunty]

I take the word support literally.

 

I don't support the club by paying to get into Ibrox.

 

 

I'll never stop being a Dons fan.

 

Ah, okay. So what you're really saying is that you'll refuse to go to Kingsford.

 

In reality though, you'll refuse to go at first, until you realise your little protest won't actually change anything and the stadium will still be staying in place. And so, eventually you'll go, just like everyone else who says they won't go.

[donsdaft]

In fact quite the opposite.

 

 

 

If I don't go at first I very probably never will go.

 

 

I really don't expect the powers that be would notice my "little protest"

[RicoS321]

Ah, okay. So what you're really saying is that you'll refuse to go to Kingsford.

 

In reality though, you'll refuse to go at first, until you realise your little protest won't actually change anything and the stadium will still be staying in place. And so, eventually you'll go, just like everyone else who says they won't go.

 

A touch patronising. I'd suggest that DD is more likely to be able to think for himself than those attracted to the shiny new thing for the first few years of its existence. Take me for instance: I've said I'll go to the Westhill arena when it's built. However, I'm also know that I wouldn't have travelled to Westhill during the Paterson, late Calderwood and McGhee eras. Whilst we may be replaced by others, you're very reliant on those "others" being as "hardcore" as the likes of me and donsdaft. That generational thing for us, that may or may not be acquired by those that come after. What I, and others, are saying is that we'll find it a lot easier to give up as there just isn't the same pull toward Westhill that makes the trip worthwhile. Hopefully Westhill will breed the next generation of super-fan, as folk like me and DD will need replaced when the time comes. It's clear that there is a very small window in which to do this, and anyone who understands the dynamics of Scottish fitba would probably realise that the odds of this aren't great. There is a good chance that the core support (let's say season ticket holders for sake of argument) will be less than current after ten years at the new stadium, and that is the measure it should be held to. Out of town developments are not the future.

[Garlogie_Granite]

In fact quite the opposite.

 

 

 

If I don't go at first I very probably never will go.

 

 

I really don't expect the powers that be would notice my "little protest"

You'll be missing out then, it'll be a shame for you, as there's nothing better than a modern fully enclosed stadium.