1 minute ago, Valerie said:

I have no idea what that means.

You don’t want to know. We’d literally have one sh*tty stadium though 

Received a letter from the CPO this morning to advise that the CPO AGM will take place at Stamford Bridge at 11am on Friday, 26 January. I hope to go along and report back but all depends on a number of family commitments which I have at the moment.

If the final price is closer to a billion than 500 million ( speculative figure granted), where's the money going to come from?

Why not retain the East and West stands, and develop two huge ends ( the fly in the ointment may be that corporate facilities which is the main driver here, tend to be situated on side stands rather than ends)

 

On ‎27‎/‎12‎/‎2017 at 14:34, Ewell CFC said:

If the final price is closer to a billion than 500 million ( speculative figure granted), where's the money going to come from?

Why not retain the East and West stands, and develop two huge ends ( the fly in the ointment may be that corporate facilities which is the main driver here, tend to be situated on side stands rather than ends)

 

What do you mean like a third tier in the MH end or building backwards so you can hold more in each level.

Build backwards- two huge cantilever ends.

Adapt the existing East and West stands to  cater for increased numbers of corporate tossers

In theory no problem yet do we have the space and also thought we were looking at least at 10k more seats. By increasing the depth of the North and South stands could we get an extra 10K?

17 hours ago, Strider6003 said:

In theory no problem yet do we have the space and also thought we were looking at least at 10k more seats. By increasing the depth of the North and South stands could we get an extra 10K?

Realistically the only way of reaching the magic 60,000 would be to go for Borussia Dortman type ends- which aren't actually cantilevered, go back forever, to the point that the seats at the very rear are about as close to pitch as watching from the back of the old Shed.

All in all very difficult to but not impossible. Ps I'm old enough to remember when the club was on its knees for years consequent to overspending on one stand. The dept reached 4 million by 1977- what would that equal in today's money I wonder?

Another way of raising capacity...

The space above the pitch is ignored. Why not have a series of wires criss crossing- connected to the top of stands. Spectators are suspended from these wires, packed in like sardines, upside down like a load if bats.

After 90 minutes or so there a danger of blackout due to blood from the body ending up in the head, but it's a price worth  paying IMO

2 hours ago, Ewell CFC said:

Realistically the only way of reaching the magic 60,000 would be to go for Borussia Dortman type ends- which aren't actually cantilevered, go back forever, to the point that the seats at the very rear are about as close to pitch as watching from the back of the old Shed.

All in all very difficult to but not impossible. Ps I'm old enough to remember when the club was on its knees for years consequent to overspending on one stand. The dept reached 4 million by 1977- what would that equal in today's money I wonder?

Thinking back to when I used to go and seeing how close the MH Harding stands were, just don't think it will work, so we would be looking at a season or more at Wembley, this might explain our reluctance to spend big in the transfer market until they have this stadium capacity increase nailed. I recall a headline saying they were looking for private investment though were finding this difficult.

Assuming we increase from 42000 capacity to about 60000, and that we fill that every week. That's an extra 18000 seats per game. Average ticket price probably about £70 these days? So that's £1.26 million more per week income from tickets. 19 home games in a season, so that's a minimum of £24m more per year (plus more for european/cup games). Let's call that about £30m a year.

In this day and age, is that really worth all the effort? The stadium is looking like costing £500m, if not more. That would take about 17 years of that extra income to pay that off. Meanwhile, player prices will continue to skyrocket to the state where Neymar will probably move back to Barcelona for £500m.

Perhaps I'm taking a very narrow view of it, but the whole idea of expanding the stadium to make more money and be more self reliant, just doesn't seem like it would really make all that much difference?

Or have I got it all wrong?

If we don't increase the stadium will that impact future cub growth through membership, as younger fans won't get a look in.

What is it like these days at home when we play the less glamorous matches against the likes of Bournemouth, Huddersfield and West Brom, is it full now?

Edited December 30, 20178 yr by strider6004

1 hour ago, Zeta said:

Assuming we increase from 42000 capacity to about 60000, and that we fill that every week. That's an extra 18000 seats per game. Average ticket price probably about £70 these days? So that's £1.26 million more per week income from tickets. 19 home games in a season, so that's a minimum of £24m more per year (plus more for european/cup games). Let's call that about £30m a year.

In this day and age, is that really worth all the effort? The stadium is looking like costing £500m, if not more. That would take about 17 years of that extra income to pay that off. Meanwhile, player prices will continue to skyrocket to the state where Neymar will probably move back to Barcelona for £500m.

Perhaps I'm taking a very narrow view of it, but the whole idea of expanding the stadium to make more money and be more self reliant, just doesn't seem like it would really make all that much difference?

Or have I got it all wrong?

The big money comes from corporate boxes which you haven't taken into account.

Also think about normal seat with hospitality. A friend had a seat in the old directors box known he as the Di Matteo suite. 3 course meal your seat and buffet after the game, this now costs over 10 grand!! There are cheaper options all the way along East middle and the tier below Abramovich in the the West. Look at the range available on a match basis in the ticket section online.

It's just a shame we're in the most popular and congested area of London. Just shows how limited for space London is when you compare to Madrid, Rome etc where all the like of Roma and Atletico have built/in the process of building new stadiums. However, saying that, Juventus is one of the smaller stadiums in Italy isn't it? 

3 minutes ago, enigma said:

It's just a shame we're in the most popular and congested area of London. Just shows how limited for space London is when you compare to Madrid, Rome etc where all the like of Roma and Atletico have built/in the process of building new stadiums. However, saying that, Juventus is one of the smaller stadiums in Italy isn't it? 

That's so true and the other problem with London is partly the high number of clubs and that they are tied to such specific areas. Cities like Rome and Madrid and Manchester too are really only two club cities, so they can move almost anywhere and still be Rome, Madrid or Manchester. If we move more than half a mile in any direction it's almost the same effect of a Manchester club moving to Liverpool.

2 hours ago, Snedger said:

That's so true and the other problem with London is partly the high number of clubs and that they are tied to such specific areas. Cities like Rome and Madrid and Manchester too are really only two club cities, so they can move almost anywhere and still be Rome, Madrid or Manchester. If we move more than half a mile in any direction it's almost the same effect of a Manchester club moving to Liverpool.

I think Chelsea could move though think they would need to move some distance before property prices drop. Perhaps they are better waiting until Brexit passes and we know the effect on property.

5 hours ago, Zeta said:

Assuming we increase from 42000 capacity to about 60000, and that we fill that every week. That's an extra 18000 seats per game. Average ticket price probably about £70 these days? So that's £1.26 million more per week income from tickets. 19 home games in a season, so that's a minimum of £24m more per year (plus more for european/cup games). Let's call that about £30m a year.

In this day and age, is that really worth all the effort? The stadium is looking like costing £500m, if not more. That would take about 17 years of that extra income to pay that off. Meanwhile, player prices will continue to skyrocket to the state where Neymar will probably move back to Barcelona for £500m.

Perhaps I'm taking a very narrow view of it, but the whole idea of expanding the stadium to make more money and be more self reliant, just doesn't seem like it would really make all that much difference?

Or have I got it all wrong?

Cororate boxes, hospitality, season tickets and different ticket prices. Also you are having 18000 more people buying merchandise, food, drink ect. I usually spend about £20 in the ground on that stuff. So that 30 million figure is more likely to be about 3 times or more.

On 28/12/2017 at 18:42, Ewell CFC said:

 

On 27/12/2017 at 14:34, Ewell CFC said:

If the final price is closer to a billion than 500 million ( speculative figure granted), where's the money going to come from?

Why not retain the East and West stands, and develop two huge ends ( the fly in the ointment may be that corporate facilities which is the main driver here, tend to be situated on side stands rather than ends)

 

 

 

Welcome to the conversation...

If we could build it in that way we'd have done it years ago.

The fly in the ointment is that it's impossible. It's an architecture miracle fitting 60k seats into the acreage and height of our current plot. 

Be happy with what we are getting, you aren't Chelsea's accountant 

8 hours ago, Strider6003 said:

If we don't increase the stadium will that impact future cub growth through membership, as younger fans won't get a look in.

What is it like these days at home when we play the less glamorous matches against the likes of Bournemouth, Huddersfield and West Brom, is it full now?

We sell out league cup games with a week's notice. We have the best attendance of any club in England.

11 hours ago, benjsross said:

 

 

Welcome to the conversation...

If we could build it in that way we'd have done it years ago.

The fly in the ointment is that it's impossible. It's an architecture miracle fitting 60k seats into the acreage and height of our current plot. 

Be happy with what we are getting, you aren't Chelsea's accountant 

TROLL ALERT

2 hours ago, Ewell CFC said:

TROLL ALERT

I think a troll is the person slagging off the stadium plans when it's taken ten years to get to this point. 

If you'd bothered to look into the issue over the past ten years you would see that your "solution" is impossible.

" Be Happy with what you are getting. You aren't Chelsea's accountant."

Sounds pretty troll like me- deliberately rude hoping to get a reaction.

Stroll on sunshine

34 minutes ago, Ewell CFC said:

" Be Happy with what you are getting. You aren't Chelsea's accountant."

Sounds pretty troll like me- deliberately rude hoping to get a reaction.

Stroll on sunshine

You were complaining about the money being too much. It's one of my biggest peeves with a football fan when they start worrying about money.

47 minutes ago, Ewell CFC said:

" Be Happy with what you are getting. You aren't Chelsea's accountant."

Sounds pretty troll like me- deliberately rude hoping to get a reaction.

Stroll on sunshine

 

Far be it from me to interject, but you're completely uninformed about the stadium. What you ask for is impossible, due to the constraints of the site. The club have employed the best architects to come up with a design and the fact we can potentially squeeze 60,000 people into an amazing new stadium is nothing short of miraculous, so yes, you should be happy. It will possibly be the most stunning stadium in the world and it will be at our historic home. The site is about 12 or 13 acres, where it is generally accepted you need at least 20 acres to build a 60k stadium. To put that into perspective, the London Stadium has a bigger footprint than our entire site. There are also several other obstacles we have to overcome, such as egress, right to light of our neighbours (meaning we have to build down rather than up), railway tracks on two sides, conservation areas bordering the site, etc etc, the list is endless. The area does not need regeneration therefore CPOs are out of the question and the club have done very well to get the council onside, because a project of this size will cause a lot of inconvenience for a number of years, not to mention the transport issues once the stadium is built. Trust me, if this stadium ever gets built, we will all owe Roman a huge debt of gratitude. Just keep your fingers crossed the club can pull it off.

You are very probably correct regarding the practicalities of squeezing 60,000 backsides into a limited space, however I get the impression that the powers that be wanted a start from scratch landmark design, rather than a hotchpotch one stand at a time affair ala Man Utd, which houses 70,000 plus.

What I do know is that you never know what's round the corner in football. Mr Abromovitch ( tugging of forlocks, thank you Sir for the stadium), might fall foul of Putin and nibble on a mercury sandwich)

Don't imagine they're would be a lengthy queue of suitors looking to take over with a potentially ruinous 1 Billion stadium rebuild ticket.

No matter how many millions have  been spent to date in architects and planning fees, what's to stop the financial reality of the situation resulting in a more modest stadium design?

Stranger things have happened.  

Ps I don't get the obsession with how flash the stadium looks from outside- window dressing in old money. When people go to the flicks they don't stand outside gazing admiringly at the architecture- it the inside that counts. 

Edited December 31, 20178 yr by Ewell CFC