Guest Shabba Ranks Posted December 12, 2007 Share Posted December 12, 2007 The beach is already recognised as a place for various facilities and very much geared towards families. Why not improve on that further and then you'll have more people using any improved transport links every day of the week rather than once a fortnight. I have to agree with this, the beach is the ideal location for a football stadium in Aberdeen, considering what's down there already and what space there is that's not being used to it's full potential. For starters, get Kings Links to f*ck and utilise that space, get Chris Anderson stadium sorted out as a decent leisure facility and sort out transport down to that area. With Union Square opening in the next 24 months, and less than 10 mins walk to the beach, it would make perfect sense to keep the stadium at the beach. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glasgow sheep Posted December 12, 2007 Share Posted December 12, 2007 I'd hazard a guess that the scottish government will get their fingers burnt on a commenwealth games overspend which won't do our stadium plans any favours. that doesn't matter as even without the Scottish Govt's interest the stadium would still go ahead according to all the stuff from the club and council. Ideally I would love the stadium to stay down by the beach but realistically there is no way that can happen given the cost of the land there and the terrible traffic problems. This is one of the most positive things to come out of Pittodrie in years and I am truly shocked that they have apparently managed to piece together a very workable and well thought out plan, along with the council, that will ensure that afc is still here in 20yrs time. Of course people will have reservations about an "out of town" stadium but we have little option and I think people are overblowing the potential downside to this. Well done afc and well down ACC (fuck me never thought I'd say that) Will be interesting to see how things go over the next few weeks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BTR Posted December 12, 2007 Share Posted December 12, 2007 Of course people will have reservations about an "out of town" stadium but we have little option and I think people are overblowing the potential downside to this. I haven't read this thread but for what it's worth, here's my take on things: I feel that the whole community stadium idea is a little bit short-sighted. I'm all for making big decisions to solve problems, of which a £10m-plus-and-growing debt is a whopper. However in selling our biggest (and arguably, only) asset to wipe out a debt without a medium-term strategy to generate capital to fund the purchase of more assets is not what I would call "visionary". Scottish football, outwith the Old Firm, does not generate enough in terms of inward investment be that from transfer fees, advertising/sponsorship, TV revenue in order to create enough liquidity flowing round the Scottish football economy. If the last 10 years have taught anyone in football anything at all, it is this. Aberdeen FC will have to bank on becoming a selling club just to remain afloat and to do so they will need to produce a Scott Brown equivalent every couple of years to keep the bank from the door. With no palpable asset to guarantee debt against, the fear factor will prevail unless we produce a successful team on the pitch every year. As a Dons fan I hope that we do provide a successful team every year in order to prove me wrong here. However it fills me with a fair bit of worry that what is being seen to be the great white hope for the future of Aberdeen FC could indeed be the very same thing that signals the beginning of the end of the club we see as the "third force". I'm thinking of the medium-term prospects for our club here rather than where the stadium is geographically located cos I'll go anywhere to watch them, but I simply think the whole thing is a bad idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superstar Tradesman Posted December 12, 2007 Share Posted December 12, 2007 that doesn't matter as even without the Scottish Govt's interest the stadium would still go ahead according to all the stuff from the club and council. Ideally I would love the stadium to stay down by the beach but realistically there is no way that can happen given the cost of the land there and the terrible traffic problems. This is one of the most positive things to come out of Pittodrie in years and I am truly shocked that they have apparently managed to piece together a very workable and well thought out plan, along with the council, that will ensure that afc is still here in 20yrs time. Of course people will have reservations about an "out of town" stadium but we have little option and I think people are overblowing the potential downside to this. Well done afc and well down ACC (fuck me never thought I'd say that) Will be interesting to see how things go over the next few weeks. But they have highlighted two possible sites for the stadium so why are you so keen on it not being down the beach? If you're taking the stance that it's too expensive then I'd argue that it isn't going to make much difference. The council don't need to buy the land, it's theirs and they're not going to sell one off instead of the other to the highest bidder to build houses on. As for the traffic side of things; I can't remember sitting in a car for any longer than 1/2 an hour after a game at worst. The Kings Links site could easily be accessed from the beach side away from residential areas and there's room on that road to become a dual carriageway. I say we fight for it to be down the beach and at worst we've got a shiny new stadium out the road. Why settle for second best? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig_don Posted December 12, 2007 Share Posted December 12, 2007 I'm more concerned on whether the council might insist on a running track than where it'll be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glasgow sheep Posted December 12, 2007 Share Posted December 12, 2007 I haven't read this thread but for what it's worth, here's my take on things: I feel that the whole community stadium idea is a little bit short-sighted. I'm all for making big decisions to solve problems, of which a £10m-plus-and-growing debt is a whopper. However in selling our biggest (and arguably, only) asset to wipe out a debt without a medium-term strategy to generate capital to fund the purchase of more assets is not what I would call "visionary". Scottish football, outwith the Old Firm, does not generate enough in terms of inward investment be that from transfer fees, advertising/sponsorship, TV revenue in order to create enough liquidity flowing round the Scottish football economy. If the last 10 years have taught anyone in football anything at all, it is this. Aberdeen FC will have to bank on becoming a selling club just to remain afloat and to do so they will need to produce a Scott Brown equivalent every couple of years to keep the bank from the door. With no palpable asset to guarantee debt against, the fear factor will prevail unless we produce a successful team on the pitch every year. As a Dons fan I hope that we do provide a successful team every year in order to prove me wrong here. However it fills me with a fair bit of worry that what is being seen to be the great white hope for the future of Aberdeen FC could indeed be the very same thing that signals the beginning of the end of the club we see as the "third force". I'm thinking of the medium-term prospects for our club here rather than where the stadium is geographically located cos I'll go anywhere to watch them, but I simply think the whole thing is a bad idea. At the moment if you took away the extra costs of running a dilapidated stadium like Pittodrie and the interest on our debt then we would be breaking even at worst. By selling Pittodrie for £20M while investing £8M into the new "Aberdeen Arena" we should clear a substantial portion of our debt. Meanwhile as primary tenants we should make a fair whack from the new stadium. Presumably if we have put that kind of money into the ground we shall own at least a proportion of the ground that can be used as an asset against any loan we have. Ultimately the aim should be to operate at break even with no, or a minimal debt. Given the current financial situation (mess) we don't seem to have much of an option anyway. In a few years time the bank will want £12M plus 5years worth of interest payments. If we don't sell up then we are well and truly fucked...and that is short-term, never mind medium term Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reekie_Red Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 "We look forward to working closely with the Council and other key stakeholders over the coming period, during which time there will undoubtedly be difficult decisions to make and massive challenges to be met. However the end goal here must surely be to overcome any difficulties we face and deliver a community stadium that will showcase the area as the most forward thinking in the country." Sorry Mr Fraser. The Dons may be forward thinking. But the City Council are more backwards than the characters of The League Of Gentlemen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bilbobaggins Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 But they have highlighted two possible sites for the stadium so why are you so keen on it not being down the beach? If you're taking the stance that it's too expensive then I'd argue that it isn't going to make much difference. The council don't need to buy the land, it's theirs and they're not going to sell one off instead of the other to the highest bidder to build houses on. As for the traffic side of things; I can't remember sitting in a car for any longer than 1/2 an hour after a game at worst. The Kings Links site could easily be accessed from the beach side away from residential areas and there's room on that road to become a dual carriageway. I say we fight for it to be down the beach and at worst we've got a shiny new stadium out the road. Why settle for second best? How's the travel time to Cove from Dusseldorf anyway? It's not a case of accepting second best. The beach area as a site does fuck all for current capacity and whatever you say parking is a nightmare on a match day. If the new stadium magically puts 5000 on the gate each week then it'll only be worse. Cove is also just as likely to be more accessible for other parts of the city, what difference does it make going to Cove than Linksfield for these kids you expect to travel there on their own? Are you expecting all the street urchins to be walking there with kit on their back for using the facilities? Mum drives them most places and of course Kincorth and Cove does have kids living there you know In a city that currently worships the the car, Cove is no problem at all. Get it built and at the same time rewrite the constitution of the club, stating that debt is not allowed. Vive la change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TENEMENTFUNSTER Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 How's the travel time to Cove from Dusseldorf anyway? It's not a case of accepting second best. The beach area as a site does fuck all for current capacity and whatever you say parking is a nightmare on a match day. If the new stadium magically puts 5000 on the gate each week then it'll only be worse. Cove is also just as likely to be more accessible for other parts of the city, what difference does it make going to Cove than Linksfield for these kids you expect to travel there on their own? Are you expecting all the street urchins to be walking there with kit on their back for using the facilities? Mum drives them most places and of course Kincorth and Cove does have kids living there you know In a city that currently worships the the car, Cove is no problem at all. Get it built and at the same time rewrite the constitution of the club, stating that debt is not allowed. Vive la change. What he said! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superstar Tradesman Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 It's not a case of accepting second best. The beach area as a site does fuck all for current capacity and whatever you say parking is a nightmare on a match day. If the new stadium magically puts 5000 on the gate each week then it'll only be worse. Parking is a nightmare.... at Pittodrie. But we're talking about doing away with a golf course and the last time I looked you couldn't fit 18 holes inside a football stadium. Build a big fuck off car park alongside the stadium - job done. Woolies, MFI & Virgin Cinemas have all managed to do so down the beach so I'm guessing someone with the technical nous to build a stadium, might manage to steam roll a couple acres of tarmac. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Peacock Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 After speaking to one of my family members last night who is working fairly intensively on this proposal at the council's end, i'm fairly excited about the development. They've got shitloads in the pipeline for major developments up that end of town, and i think it'll be a really big thing for both the club and the city as a whole. And i must admit that i'm surprised that there are people moaning about the fact it's a whole three miles from union street. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bilbobaggins Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 Parking is a nightmare.... at Pittodrie. But we're talking about doing away with a golf course and the last time I looked you couldn't fit 18 holes inside a football stadium. Build a big fuck off car park alongside the stadium - job done. Woolies, MFI & Virgin Cinemas have all managed to do so down the beach so I'm guessing someone with the technical nous to build a stadium, might manage to steam roll a couple acres of tarmac. I suspect a couple of acres of free parking is not the best use of that expensive real estate though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 Parking is a nightmare.... at Pittodrie. But we're talking about doing away with a golf course and the last time I looked you couldn't fit 18 holes inside a football stadium. No we're not, we'd be building on top of what is currently the driving range and a couple of holes of the golf course at the very most. The golf course will still be there, they'll just be shifting the demolished parts further north. There wouldn't be that much scope for extra parking. And for the hardened drinkers, it will also mean the loss of the Broadhill Bar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superstar Tradesman Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 I suspect a couple of acres of free parking is not the best use of that expensive real estate though. So no parking at Cove then? They could charge what they like for parking and if it puts people off driving (which it won't) then they'll profit from the public transport. It's not like they'll be raking it in from golf fees as it is at the moment anyway. There's plenty room down the beach to move the course further north. You've got that great big bit of land which people currently use to fly kites for a start. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TENEMENTFUNSTER Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 And for the hardened drinkers, it will also mean the loss of the Broadhill Bar. FFS!! Oppose this proposal at all costs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bilbobaggins Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 Caps, what you worried about anway? you're never there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reekie_Red Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 Gutted that we'd be losing our favourite waterholes of the Bobbin, Broadhill and Pittodrie Bars. Even on non-matchdays if ye have to walk the length of King Street, the Bobbin and Pitt are ideally positioned for a half-way refresher or four. But if they can get the transport sorted for this new place, such as a rail shuttle service (preferably free!!!) then it'd be awesome. Plus it would quite literally be a hop, skip and a jump fae the Station Hotel in Stoney!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TENEMENTFUNSTER Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 Gutted that we'd be losing our favourite waterholes of the Bobbin, Broadhill and Pittodrie Bars. Even on non-matchdays if ye have to walk the length of King Street, the Bobbin and Pitt are ideally positioned for a half-way refresher or four. There will be new watering holes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reekie_Red Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 good stadium desgns here: http://www.wimp.com/stadium/ Obviously I'd expect UEFA to impose harsh penalties upon this club for allowing flares at their stadium! F'kn! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superstar Tradesman Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 Caps, what you worried about anway? you're never there. I just think removing the club from the public eye is a bad move and if they're wanting a community stadium then it should be placed slap bang in the middle of it. I couldn't give a toss if it's down at the beach per se but I still think it should be in town somewhere. There's just nothing that beats the buzz of a big game when you're walking through town, all heading in the same direction. You can't see the stadium then you turn the corner and BANG! there it is. That'll be lost if everyone is heading out of town, via various routes stuck in the back of a car. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Peacock Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 NO chance of rail improvents - we gave up asking for electrification of the line... every year they cut back on the number of trains stopping at stoney and porty. It's not the london olympics we're getting, or even the commonwealth games, don't expect any REAL infrastructure to arrive out of this. Yes, we might get a weatherspoons, a pizza hut and a new tesco... but no major road imrpovements and no new public transmport except possibly shuttle buses. Expect it also to be used for a wealth of planning apllications for new housing to join up Aberdeen and porty (as is already happening) - would be interesting how much of that land stewart milne already has options on. By the final planning stage, they will have ditched a football academy, ditched the training grounds, ditched the facilities Quite the ray of sunshine aren't we? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BTR Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 At the moment if you took away the extra costs of running a dilapidated stadium like Pittodrie and the interest on our debt then we would be breaking even at worst. By selling Pittodrie for £20M while investing £8M into the new "Aberdeen Arena" we should clear a substantial portion of our debt. Meanwhile as primary tenants we should make a fair whack from the new stadium. Presumably if we have put that kind of money into the ground we shall own at least a proportion of the ground that can be used as an asset against any loan we have. Ultimately the aim should be to operate at break even with no, or a minimal debt. Given the current financial situation (mess) we don't seem to have much of an option anyway. In a few years time the bank will want £12M plus 5years worth of interest payments. If we don't sell up then we are well and truly fucked...and that is short-term, never mind medium term I'm not convinced. Look at it this way - the land at Pittodrie is worth £20m, of which AFC would get all of it. How much do we think the land at Loirston would be worth if it was to be held as an asset for the club? £50m? No chance, it'll be closer to £15m-£20m. In other words if AFC put £8m into the £50m+ build cost, they'll be instantly writing off something like £5m as their "investment" as you call it will be more like £3m in real terms at the most. Of course the debt will be wiped out, the interest payments and excessive running costs (don't be fooled, they wont be that much) will have gone, but the board will have to run a very tight ship. And I'm just not convinced with where the last 15 years have left us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superstar Tradesman Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 Quite the ray of sunshine aren't we? No he's not. But either are the powers that be in Aberdeen. Rail links, monorails, undergrounds, trams, hotels, shops, gyms, blah, blah, blah..... my arse. I fully agree with Jager and his views that nothing other than a stadium will be built. Don't think for one minute that the 'club' are choosing this site for the good of the club or the fans. The directors will be choosing this in the name of the club but for their own reasons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kowalski Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 NO chance of rail improvents - we gave up asking for electrification of the line... every year they cut back on the number of trains stopping at stoney and porty. It's not the london olympics we're getting, or even the commonwealth games, don't expect any REAL infrastructure to arrive out of this. Yes, we might get a weatherspoons, a pizza hut and a new tesco... but no major road imrpovements and no new public transmport except possibly shuttle buses. Expect it also to be used for a wealth of planning apllications for new housing to join up Aberdeen and porty (as is already happening) - would be interesting how much of that land stewart milne already has options on. By the final planning stage, they will have ditched a football academy, ditched the training grounds, ditched the facilities Are you Stoney from BNP-Chat? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TENEMENTFUNSTER Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 He can't be. Not unless DT has a spellchecker that BNP doesn't! 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.