49 replies to this topic

[Barry Bridges]

This subject has been raised a few times and the main reasons I hear against it are "Where will we find the space in London" and "We won't be able to fill a bigger stadium".

I would like to address the latter point first. Apparently we are already sold out for season tickets, and with our ongoing success (and hopefully continual success) I cant think that our fan base is going to do anything but grow(or you Londoners could help by starting to squirt out kids like an assembly line!). I think its better to have an over supply of seats that will eventually get filled as opposed to not having enough seats and missing out on vital revenue until we can create the supply. Also it would be ideal to get this sorted if possible while we are still owned by a billionaire who also happens to be a great fan of the club.

Now in regards to location, I will admit Im not 100% sure of what Im talking about as Ive only been to London on short visits and thus Im quite unfamiliar with the cities geography.

Apparently its going to be impossible to reasonabley relocate within London due t a lack of developable land, and we cant do much to the Bridge as it would require massive reconstruction but we need it to play games! Now I've heard that Spurs/Hammers have been thinking about exploring the possibility of using the London Olympic stadium after the Olympics. Now since then Spurs have planned to built a new one, but I think the West Ham owners will still angling to get a foot in the door.

Does anyone think, business details aside, that sometime in the future it would be logical for Chelsea to try and lease the Olympic stadium for a year or 2 while reconstruction/seating renovations were implemented at the Stamford Bridge grounds? Eventually Chelsea will need a bigger ground for the fans and for the finiances....

Edited by Barry Bridges, 28 July 2010 - 10:21 PM.

[TimW]

two things:

the main reason against moving is that stamford bridge is our home. always has been, hopefully always will be.

and the reason we cannot expand it is because all of the stands exit onto the same road.

[Ruh Buh Juh]

I remember an interview with Bruce Buck at the end of last season and he said moving to a new place isn't an option because there's no room in London. However, he did say something about expanding the Matthew Harding. He said the main issue with getting a new stadium/bigger capacity is that there's only one entrance and exit, really. If we build another one or two exits, then a bigger capacity is for sure on the cards. I hope we get a bigger capacity because I don't see 42,000 being enough for a club like us, with an ever growing fan base. I think we should aim for 50,000 at least in the near-ish future.

EDIT: Little query. We haven't sold the Stamford Bridge naming rights yet, have we?

Edited by Ruh Buh Juh, 28 July 2010 - 10:25 PM.

[Sheva]

Also apparently the Olympic stadium is huge inside and there would be quite some distance between the fans and the pitch, like the Delle Alpi. It wont be a case of there you go there's a stadium all ready for you too move into, if West ham or Spurs get the Olympic stadium they would have to spend millions completley revamping it and basically starting from scratch with just the outer shell.

[Barry Bridges]

 gullit4, on 28 July 2010 - 10:21 PM, said:

two things:

the main reason against moving is that stamford bridge is our home. always has been, hopefully always will be.

and the reason we cannot expand it is because all of the stands exit onto the same road.

Exactly. That why I think this proposal will have some merit. We can do drastic changes to the Bridge to allow more gate locations and seating while temporarily changing our location to allow for the work to be completer ( I imagine it would take alteast 1 season to do this type of construction). This will allow us to keep the Bridge as our home while allowing the club to further evolve.

[TimW]

I should be clearer:

the stands only exit onto one road because only one road exists.

[bluegraham]

chelsea always had problems with extending the groud because of the one road issue,it took us along time to finish the ground as it is today. i can't believe that any chelsea fan would want to leave the bridge it's a disgusting thought. for me growing up and going over to the bridge it was amazing seeing the ground develop into the stadium it is. from the knocking of the old shed to the mh stand then the knocking of the benhes ( west stand ) the bucket seats in the shed. thiis for me was the best think about going to watch chelsea seeing the changes of the ground. i loved it. stamford bridge is our home and i hope it always is. i also believe if chelsea lefted the bridge we would have to gve up the name chelsea fc.,i could be wrong with that. i was going to games with 20.000 against the likes of coventry,the ground was big enough then so its big enough now. god forgive if thinks did go wrong i cant see us attracking our chinese friends. stamford bridge is part of our history and im proud of our history. STAMFORD BRIDGE TO WEMBLEY WE'LL KEEP THE BLUE FLAG FLYING HIGH. WE SHALL NOT BE MOVED.

[mad_mac]

You seriously think it's a good idea moving Chelsea for two years into a Stadium in EAST london?

[andy]

The fan base thing is an issue, I have had trouble shifting my season tickets on this site for lesser games before at a very health discounted price! We just don't sell out at the moment why would or should we increase the capacity. if the club had a major rethink such as lowering ticket prices and serving a decent pint then a bigger stadium is worth it.

[G4 Squared]

If there was a 60,000 ticket demand for every home game without cup reductions I'm sure they would look at a move/redevelopment more closely. From listening to Bruce Buck the club seems to expect other forms of "watching" becoming more likely (TV rights, Internet) and see 42,000 as a manageable figure and that's why efforts have been made to increase revenue through other means (a shirt costs nearly as much as a game). Cutting back the wage bill to a reasonable level, developing home-developed players have a far greater effect on the financial health of the club than redeveloping SB or moving to a 60,000/70,000 stadium, which in a few years, only has 25,000 attendance. It was that long ago the average gate at SB was under 20,000. Of course winning trophies also attracts more sponsors (although the Samsung/Adidas partnership seems hard to beat).

A move, or redeveloping SB, not a chance.

[c3blu]

The main problem with relocating is under the chelsea pitch owners scheme if we were to move we could no longer be called chelsea football club.
Stamford bridge used to hold 100,000 its only the health and safety brigade that is causing problems with increasing the bridges capacity from its current 42,000.
We have always had a big fan base, our all time average is 36,000(better than so called big clubs like Villa,Newcastle,Sunderland,Everton,city etc) and this without any success throughout the years, it was very short sighted of Ken Bates when he redevolped the ground last time.
There must be ways around the current restrictions, building a bridge over the tube or train lines running along the side and back of the ground etc would provide other exits, getting permission from residents or the church is the problem though.
Saying we dont sell out our tickets is cobblers, we sold out every week before RA came along and still do, we have a season ticket waiting list and over 150,000 members so there is more than enough interest.
Ticket pricing on the other hand is another issue, It is way to expensive for most people, i'd rather have 80,000 people paying £20 than 40,000 paying £40, i'm just not sure the club would.....god knows why.

Edited by c3blu, 29 July 2010 - 08:25 AM.

[bar24rat]

At the present time Chelsea is supposedly "debt-free" with a capacity of 42000 whereas Man U have debts publicised at over 700 million with a capacity of 70000. The reason is simple-Abramovich. He has cleared all Chelsea's debts by accepting more and more shares. It's highly unlikely the situation will continue indefinitely. We have to be realistic. For now Roman enjoys leaping around in his box like a demented chimp when things are going well-we all saw him in the 8-0 victory over Wigan- but until when! How long is "the duration" to quote an often used phrase.
42000 plus other income sources will not meet total expenditure unless costs i.e. mainly wages and transfers are substantially reduced. Real Madrid is regularly bailed out from the city coffers, Barca is owned predominantly by the people of Catalone so their "debts" are covered in other ways.
So what is the solution? There is no problem for Bruce Buck personally as he would probably move on if Roman left anyway, an increase in capacity is essential. Research is needed to ascertain the balance between....

1. moving to a new home-unlikely and unpopular
2. increasing capacity- the best option perhaps
what figure would be supported sufficiently by ticket sales-extra 10000 would bring in additional revenue of half million every 2 weeks
3. the status quo- insupportable outlays to stay at the top

Others will have their input and ideas, surely now is the time to put it on the agenda

[loz]

Barry

There have been a couple of discussions about this before (going back a few years now) which may interest you

http://www.thesheden...-a-new-stadium/

and

http://www.thesheden...-a-new-stadium/

[HisDogSpot]

Would it be a possibility if the expanded the Bridge and with the over crowding let certain stands out 1st and leave some until it has calmed down

This would also stop the twats who leave ten mins before the end to catch a tube

[Cam]

Create a glass roof....and just sell some tickets to....adventurists to lay on the glass and watch the game.

[G4 Squared]

 c3blu, on 29 July 2010 - 08:18 AM, said:

Saying we dont sell out our tickets is cobblers, we sold out every week before RA came along

I'm afraid the figures don't back you up (remember compulsory seating was introduced in 1994)

Attendance averages

[Blue_Swede]

The West Brom game is yet to sell out and it's been a week and a half since tickets went on sale to members. It might go to general sale. I can't believe that seeing as it's the first game of the season for the defending champions. It should have been sold out on the first day the tickets went on sale.

Tottenham and Arsenal have season tickets waiting lists with thousands of names on them. People have to wait for years, if not decades to get a season ticket at sh*te Hart Lane or the Emirates. At Chelsea all you have to do is attend a fair amount of games one season and then you can get a season ticket the following season.

Let's face it. Our match going fan base isn't as big as we'd like to think.

[bonetti]

 gullit4, on 29 July 2010 - 12:20 AM, said:

I should be clearer:

the stands only exit onto one road because only one road exists.

Not sure what point you are making - can you elaborate

[Eggy McMuffin]

 HisDogSpot, on 29 July 2010 - 10:56 AM, said:

Would it be a possibility if the expanded the Bridge and with the over crowding let certain stands out 1st and leave some until it has calmed down

This would also stop the twats who leave ten mins before the end to catch a tube

That's not the issue. We need to be able to completely clear the stadium in 5 minutes flat, in case of a fire, terrorist attack or some other emergency. With only the one road, there simply is no way to get people out faster.

[bluegraham]

 bonetti, on 29 July 2010 - 03:44 PM, said:

Not sure what point you are making - can you elaborate

behind the east stand your have a railway line also behind the north stand you have the distrct line,so that only leaves 3 ways out via the britiania gate the stamford gate entrance and the brovil gate. which all goes on to the one road being the fulham road thats what guillt4 i think is trying to say.