Skip to content
View in the app

A better way to browse. Learn more.
The Shed End - Chelsea FC Forums

A full-screen app on your home screen with push notifications, badges and more.

To install this app on iOS and iPadOS
  1. Tap the Share icon in Safari
  2. Scroll the menu and tap Add to Home Screen.
  3. Tap Add in the top-right corner.
To install this app on Android
  1. Tap the 3-dot menu (⋮) in the top-right corner of the browser.
  2. Tap Add to Home screen or Install app.
  3. Confirm by tapping Install.

Our New Stadium

junio_oscarSY
in General Chelsea FC

Featured Replies

10 hours ago, Boyne said:

The next CPO AGM which is due to take place this coming January could be interesting especially if there is the likelihood of a move from Stamford Bridge and how CPO shareholders will react. 

I'm planning to go so will report back in due course.

From the last few times it was discussed Earls Court is likely to be acceptable to a lot of the CPO lads, as far as I could tell. As much as everyone would prefer not to move away from the Bridge at all, Earls court is at least the best option.

    13 hours ago, WhiteWall said:

    Going to start to see all of this type of propaganda now that we have this tug of war going on. All it tells me is that this is all bo**ocks

    100%. Is there actually anything new in what's been leaked/announced?

    - Redeveloping the Bridge is unlikely to be feasible;

    - Earl's Court has been discussed internally as a potential new location;

    - Nothing concrete is in place, and ECDC have told us to f**k off. 

    I thought we had planning permission to redevelop Stamford Bridge under Roman bar a few local concerns. I thought the Earls court site had been sold as well. 

    And I dont trust the current board to get this decision right at all. It looks like therye deliberately trying to move us out of stamford bridge. 

    https://www.theguardian.com/football/2023/jul/19/chelsea-agree-to-buy-land-next-to-stamford-bridge-stadium-rebuild-earls-court

    Edited by bluetrooper

    30 minutes ago, PloKoon13 said:

    100%. Is there actually anything new in what's been leaked/announced?

    - Redeveloping the Bridge is unlikely to be feasible;

    - Earl's Court has been discussed internally as a potential new location;

    - Nothing concrete is in place, and ECDC have told us to f**k off. 

    You never know perhaps some of the most obstructive voices have died and the prospect of more cash into the area might help.

    15 hours ago, The Rising Sun said:

    From the Architect's Journal from March 2024

    Images of proposed Earls Court first phase redevelopment.

    Can't see our stadium in there.

    In fact , it looks like a fantasy image !

     

    4144_01_Warwick_Apron_Square_Final_100324-scaled-e1710238335806.thumb.jpg.6af808138b0109dc5fa34bf58b8dbae2.jpg

    This looks exactly like Kidbrooke

    20 hours ago, Boyne said:

    The next CPO AGM which is due to take place this coming January could be interesting especially if there is the likelihood of a move from Stamford Bridge and how CPO shareholders will react. 

    I'm planning to go so will report back in due course.

    I hope you, and the rest of the CPO,use your power to block these owners at every turn. Whether it is moving somewhere or developing the Bridge.

    Show them we are not going to stand for their player trafficking, their treatment of the fan base and that we will stop them from maximizing their profits. That they need to get out cause we know they only see us as dollar signs. Us, and the players.

    12 hours ago, dkw said:

    From the last few times it was discussed Earls Court is likely to be acceptable to a lot of the CPO lads, as far as I could tell. As much as everyone would prefer not to move away from the Bridge at all, Earls court is at least the best option.

    I had to check the post I made after last year's CPO AGM and there was a straw poll at the end of the meeting and although some people abstained the majority voted to stay at the Bridge. From what I recall there was between fifty and sixty people at the meeting. I'm not sure how many CPO shareholders there but I guess a few thousand so the vote wasn't indicative of all shareholders views. It would be interesting to see the results if all CPO Shareholders voted and then all season ticket holders/members voted about whether or not to stay at the Bridge. I suspect the majority would vote to leave and Earl's Court would, in my view, be the best option. Leaving the Bridge would be a wrench but if we want a larger ground a move is probably the only option. Chelsea, as we know, wouldn't be the first club to move grounds and the CPO was a great idea when it was first setup but has it outlasted it's purpose? I'm sure that there are loads of views on that. Perhaps the Chelsea board could offer a stake in a new ground and/or payment for CPO shares.

    3 hours ago, axman2526 said:

    I hope you, and the rest of the CPO,use your power to block these owners at every turn. Whether it is moving somewhere or developing the Bridge.

    Show them we are not going to stand for their player trafficking, their treatment of the fan base and that we will stop them from maximizing their profits. That they need to get out cause we know they only see us as dollar signs. Us, and the players.

    We can certainly make our views known about the owners but unfortunately I don't think we shareholders and the board have that much clout with the owners.  As for treatment of the fanbase I have to agree. I recently had a phone call with the club about the clash of the men's and women's games on 6 October. As a season ticket holder for both teams I have to decide which game to go and was angry when I spoke to the ticket office and told them that I thought the owners of the club were incompetent. That didn't go down well.

    It would be nice if the board were to make an announcement about the ground soon but guess that will be dependent on the developers of the Earl's Court site; Hammersmith and Fulham Council; Kensington and Chelsea Council and TFL. I wonder if part of the deal to move to Earl's Court would involve selling Stamford Bridge to developers. Developers would love to get their hands on Stamford Bridge as it's prime land - remember Marler Estates - for flats etc. The councils and local residents may agree to the club moving to Earl's Court but on the proviso that the ground is only used for games and not other events e.g. concerts. Only using the ground for football would mean less revenue for the club but the councils have to consider the bigger picture including residents objections. Could drag on for sometime.

    3 hours ago, Boyne said:

    I had to check the post I made after last year's CPO AGM and there was a straw poll at the end of the meeting and although some people abstained the majority voted to stay at the Bridge. From what I recall there was between fifty and sixty people at the meeting. I'm not sure how many CPO shareholders there but I guess a few thousand so the vote wasn't indicative of all shareholders views. It would be interesting to see the results if all CPO Shareholders voted and then all season ticket holders/members voted about whether or not to stay at the Bridge. I suspect the majority would vote to leave and Earl's Court would, in my view, be the best option. Leaving the Bridge would be a wrench but if we want a larger ground a move is probably the only option. Chelsea, as we know, wouldn't be the first club to move grounds and the CPO was a great idea when it was first setup but has it outlasted it's purpose? I'm sure that there are loads of views on that. Perhaps the Chelsea board could offer a stake in a new ground and/or payment for CPO shares.

    We can certainly make our views known about the owners but unfortunately I don't think we shareholders and the board have that much clout with the owners.  As for treatment of the fanbase I have to agree. I recently had a phone call with the club about the clash of the men's and women's games on 6 October. As a season ticket holder for both teams I have to decide which game to go and was angry when I spoke to the ticket office and told them that I thought the owners of the club were incompetent. That didn't go down well.

    It would be nice if the board were to make an announcement about the ground soon but guess that will be dependent on the developers of the Earl's Court site; Hammersmith and Fulham Council; Kensington and Chelsea Council and TFL. I wonder if part of the deal to move to Earl's Court would involve selling Stamford Bridge to developers. Developers would love to get their hands on Stamford Bridge as it's prime land - remember Marler Estates - for flats etc. The councils and local residents may agree to the club moving to Earl's Court but on the proviso that the ground is only used for games and not other events e.g. concerts. Only using the ground for football would mean less revenue for the club but the councils have to consider the bigger picture including residents objections. Could drag on for sometime.

    You do the best you can mate, same with anyone at the CPO. You guys are the heart of the club and what keeps it alive while these bloodsuckers try and take everything from us 

    11 hours ago, Boyne said:

    It would be nice if the board were to make an announcement about the ground soon but guess that will be dependent on the developers of the Earl's Court site; Hammersmith and Fulham Council; Kensington and Chelsea Council and TFL. I wonder if part of the deal to move to Earl's Court would involve selling Stamford Bridge to developers. Developers would love to get their hands on Stamford Bridge as it's prime land - remember Marler Estates - for flats etc. The councils and local residents may agree to the club moving to Earl's Court but on the proviso that the ground is only used for games and not other events e.g. concerts. Only using the ground for football would mean less revenue for the club but the councils have to consider the bigger picture including residents objections. Could drag on for sometime.

    I’m not sure why the bold part would happen, after all the Earls Court exhibition centre held many events including concerts so, I don’t know why this would not be allowed to happen if Stamford Bridge was relocated there. Also, the local residents were opposed to the demolition of the Exhibiton centre because the area was going to suffer socially and economically. A new Chelsea stadium there used also for other events would revamp the area, not only with football fans but also with music or art lovers. Why would the local residents oppose the same thing they were fighting for a decade ago?

    WE CANNOT ALLOW THIS TO HAPPEN , STAMFORD BRIDGE IS OUR HOME , THE FANS OWN FREEHOLD OF PITCH , FANS OWN NAME. ANY STADIUM CAN BE DEVELOPED AT STAMFORD BRIDGE . SO LET THEM DO IT THERE.   END OF. DEVOPELING STAMFORD BRIDGE IS AN OPTION roman got planning permission but let it lapse as he saw writing on wall for him.  CPO MUST HOLD AGAINST THE OWNERS EITHER DEVELOPE THE BRIDGE OR FCK OFF.

    Edited by alwayshopeful

    @Boyne Good post above.

    Not fussed about Earls Court should it come to something as long as it is near Fulham and the CPO get some sort of hold to stop the ground in the future being sold for non-football purposes.

    Would also like some mention in a 'new venue' of Stamford Bridge, The Shed and like the gallery of notable players we have outside the ground on the outer wall to be at a new site to reinforce we do have history even if no-one else agrees!

     

     

    44 minutes ago, strider6004 said:

    Would also like some mention in a 'new venue' of Stamford Bridge, The Shed and like the gallery of notable players we have outside the ground on the outer wall to be at a new site to reinforce we do have history even if no-one else agrees!

    Nice idea, albeit we'll probably get the Behdad Eghbali Stand and some nice statues of Fernandez and Mudryk 🙂 

    22 hours ago, Boyne said:

    I had to check the post I made after last year's CPO AGM and there was a straw poll at the end of the meeting and although some people abstained the majority voted to stay at the Bridge. From what I recall there was between fifty and sixty people at the meeting. I'm not sure how many CPO shareholders there but I guess a few thousand so the vote wasn't indicative of all shareholders views. It would be interesting to see the results if all CPO Shareholders voted and then all season ticket holders/members voted about whether or not to stay at the Bridge. I suspect the majority would vote to leave and Earl's Court would, in my view, be the best option. Leaving the Bridge would be a wrench but if we want a larger ground a move is probably the only option. Chelsea, as we know, wouldn't be the first club to move grounds and the CPO was a great idea when it was first setup but has it outlasted it's purpose? I'm sure that there are loads of views on that. Perhaps the Chelsea board could offer a stake in a new ground and/or payment for CPO shares.

    We can certainly make our views known about the owners but unfortunately I don't think we shareholders and the board have that much clout with the owners.  As for treatment of the fanbase I have to agree. I recently had a phone call with the club about the clash of the men's and women's games on 6 October. As a season ticket holder for both teams I have to decide which game to go and was angry when I spoke to the ticket office and told them that I thought the owners of the club were incompetent. That didn't go down well.

    It would be nice if the board were to make an announcement about the ground soon but guess that will be dependent on the developers of the Earl's Court site; Hammersmith and Fulham Council; Kensington and Chelsea Council and TFL. I wonder if part of the deal to move to Earl's Court would involve selling Stamford Bridge to developers. Developers would love to get their hands on Stamford Bridge as it's prime land - remember Marler Estates - for flats etc. The councils and local residents may agree to the club moving to Earl's Court but on the proviso that the ground is only used for games and not other events e.g. concerts. Only using the ground for football would mean less revenue for the club but the councils have to consider the bigger picture including residents objections. Could drag on for sometime.

    Bate's brainchild, the CPO , was vital at the time to safeguard Stamford Bridge from property developers.

    I suppose many on here won't know about the fight to save the Bridge. Marler also owned Fulham and QPR and wanted to merge both teams and build on Craven Cottage, and it was eventually only a property crash that put Marler out of business and saved us, and the creation of the CPO was to prevent it happening again.

    It may have seemed to have outlived Its purpose, but you never know when it might be our saviour again, no one could have foreseen the forced sale of our club, who knows what's in store for us in the future, especially with the owners falling out with each other..

    Earl's Court has been ruled out so many times in the past, it would be a miracle if it's back on.

    I would definitely be in support of a move there if redevelopment isn't feasible.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    51 minutes ago, The Rising Sun said:

    ....was vital at the time to safeguard Stamford Bridge from property developers.

    I suppose many on here won't know about the fight to save the Bridge.

    Do you remember the old 'Chelsea Fun Days' in the late 80s? Batesy was literally walking around with a Save The Bridge coin shaker collecting money!

    I was a fresh-faced nipper but still remember them unveiling a new player one year with an on-pitch training session, and that was Graeme Le Saux! 👀

    Isn't the cpo also a potential barrier for Chelsea to play PL games abroad. That 38th game that's made its rounds again in the media not too long ago. Can't use the name "chelsea" if playing a PL game abroad or something.

    CPO definitely has its place I believe and should be considered in the plans at earls Court if we move there.

    It can be classed as a barrier for the owners too but i believe it can also help the club and owners in other ways including any legal matters in the future in rgds to the PL.

     

     

    One question that I wondered about is without the CPO could the gov have had more control on who to sell this amazing piece of real estate too! Makes you wonder how corrupt or worse it may have been. Irrelevant either way, doubt they could "delete" a PL club as big as Chelsea, but it was just a thought.

    Edited by Simplymo

    Create an account or sign in to comment
    Go to topic listing

    Recently Browsing 0

    • No registered users viewing this page.
    Background Picker
    Customize Layout

    Account

    Navigation

    Search

    Search

    Configure browser push notifications
    Chrome (Android)
    1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
    2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
    3. Adjust your preference.
    Chrome (Desktop)
    1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
    2. Select Site settings.
    3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.