Season tickets sold out

[lets all have a disco]

Surely we'd just do the same as when we left Maine Road, stay in the Etihad until any new stadium is finished .... it's not like the club haven't just bought shed loads of land so the current stadium could in effect become the reserves home ground, the best reserve home ground in the world .... ever

I guess, but i thought all the land over the road was accounted for?

I dunno but i hope the sheikh has got his top boys on it dont want to end up with a huge scaffolding piece of shit like the swamp.

[john68]

Kiers,
I ignored the swamp option as a non option.

Best I can do is the City of Salford Stadium...10,000 inside the ground and the rest of us overlooking from the Barton Bridge. Shades of Ewood Park.

[Alex Sapphire]

Quick question where the fook would we play if they knocked the ground down and started again?

SWAMP IS NOT AN OPTION.

I can imagine 60k blues inside old Trafford singing "we're not really here!".

you can imagine 18000 empty seats? Me too.

surely they should just repeat what they did in 2002/3 and lower our pitch to fit a new tier in. A couple of weeks work there, that's all.

[Socrates]

Quick question where the fook would we play if they knocked the ground down and started again?

SWAMP IS NOT AN OPTION.

I can imagine 60k blues inside old Trafford singing "we're not really here!".

you can imagine 18000 empty seats? Me too.

surely they should just repeat what they did in 2002/3 and lower our pitch to fit a new tier in. A couple of weeks work there, that's all.

would leave enough room fora couple of five a side pitches!

[Alex Sapphire]

Quick question where the fook would we play if they knocked the ground down and started again?

SWAMP IS NOT AN OPTION.

I can imagine 60k blues inside old Trafford singing "we're not really here!".

you can imagine 18000 empty seats? Me too.

surely they should just repeat what they did in 2002/3 and lower our pitch to fit a new tier in. A couple of weeks work there, that's all.

would leave enough room fora couple of five a side pitches!

I was going to suggest we put the running track back so we can host more events, so maybe 2 pitches is ambitious

[Socrates]

Quick question where the fook would we play if they knocked the ground down and started again?

SWAMP IS NOT AN OPTION.

I can imagine 60k blues inside old Trafford singing "we're not really here!".

you can imagine 18000 empty seats? Me too.

surely they should just repeat what they did in 2002/3 and lower our pitch to fit a new tier in. A couple of weeks work there, that's all.

would leave enough room fora couple of five a side pitches!

I was going to suggest we put the running track back so we can host more events, so maybe 2 pitches is ambitious

I just went dizzy thinking about it.

[Blue Since 76]

I think i've mentioned this before but a mate of mine in construction of this scale says that it would probably cost more to build a third tier than knock it down and start again

Depends if it was designed for future expansion. I had heard it's the same design as the emirates but without the third tier all the way round.

However, before we moved in I asked John Wardle at a City branch do if it could be expanded, as apparently the stadium of light was built that way, so they could cheaply increase the number of seats and he said no, and sort of laughed off the need to ever do it.

I think the plans spurs had, with a massive tier at one end would be the way we'd go, as it'd allow a hotel and conference venue to be built in. More seats and more revenue

[john@staustell]

I think i've mentioned this before but a mate of mine in construction of this scale says that it would probably cost more to build a third tier than knock it down and start again

Depends if it was designed for future expansion. I had heard it's the same design as the emirates but without the third tier all the way round.

However, before we moved in I asked John Wardle at a City branch do if it could be expanded, as apparently the stadium of light was built that way, so they could cheaply increase the number of seats and he said no, and sort of laughed off the need to ever do it.

I think the plans spurs had, with a massive tier at one end would be the way we'd go, as it'd allow a hotel and conference venue to be built in. More seats and more revenue

I thought I saw on that massive thread on BM that has finally died, that it is possible to build a third and/or even 4th tier using some sort of cantilever style. IE the weight would not be supported by the existing structure but by by a new arrangement. Now I may be mis-remembering this a bit, but it was an engineer who was suggesting it. Unfortunately I am not, so I dont know how feasible this is.

[Ted Hughes]

It depends what else they are planning on building.

The whole roof could be removed, never to return, & replaced by some other structure. Anything is possible.

[ashton287]

Just knock the fucker down and build a brand spanking new 125,000 seater monster that shits on wembley and be done with it forevermore.

[s1ty m]

A bit gutted that I won't be able to buy a SC for my wife and daughter. I didn't expect to locate them near me in East Level 1, but to have no chance of a SC is disappointing. That said, it's a sign of where we are. I have been advised that they 'may' be able to get Blue SCs to have a chance of getting to some games.

We need a bigger stadium, end of.

[ant london]

Without sounding like I'm stating the obvious, would there not likely be enough space on the land available to just build a new stadium adjacent to the existing one, then knock the old one down???

[ashton287]

Without sounding like I'm stating the obvious, would there not likely be enough space on the land available to just build a new stadium adjacent to the existing one, then knock the old one down???

Wouldn't we have to buy the stadium off the council to be allowed to knock it down?

[Chinners]

Without sounding like I'm stating the obvious, would there not likely be enough space on the land available to just build a new stadium adjacent to the existing one, then knock the old one down???

Exactly. Don't knock it down thou ... our reserves can use it!

[ant london]

Without sounding like I'm stating the obvious, would there not likely be enough space on the land available to just build a new stadium adjacent to the existing one, then knock the old one down???

Wouldn't we have to buy the stadium off the council to be allowed to knock it down?

Hmmm, yes and no. I guess that we could either do that or grant them some kind of equivalent freehold interest in the new stadium (ie. keep paying them what we've been paying to date per year) or just get their agreement that we can knock it down and rebuild another. Ultimately the stadium and land is never going to revert to them as we'll always be using it for football.

The council's interest is in getting the income and, most importantly, the economic stimulus that City the club and the football team brings to Manchester. It's neither here nor there to them in real terms whether we knock it down IMO

[Im_Spartacus]

Imo, the expansion is most likely to be done as part of the development around the ground. We surely can't build that, then start taking the roof off the ground; it wouldn't make sense ?

I don't know how far they want to go with the development nearby but it's not impossible to imagine the structure of the ground becoming part of it if they think it's worth doing.

I would imagine that the way to do it would be: try to build the waiting list to a genuine 15/20,000 then expand the ground & sell season tickets to all of them. Hence 56,000 season ticket holders, 15,000 or so seats available to members. Instantly you would have crowd averages similar to rags.

This is why we need to keep bringing in one or two top players for the next year or two imo, even if it upsets Platini. Once we get those fans in, we've cracked it.

How have we cracked it?

Even at 50 quid a time, 20,000 extra fans x 19 only equates 180,000 extra visitors paying a total of £9m of additional matchday revenue over the season. It's just not worth the investment that would be needed to accommodate those extra 20,000 whichever way you look at it.

The only possible way would be if it were 20,000 hospitality seats at say 100quid a time, then it starts to make sense at 18m a year........except that even with the season tickets sold out, i guarantee there will be gaping voids of unsold corporate seats this year again - that market is going to need to drag the corporates away from old traffford where they have had a presence for the last 20 years, as we will be in direct competition with the rags for that type of business, and i expect we would have to win the league several times before we got a sniff of denting uniteds dominance in that area.

[Alex Sapphire]

"they" make about 5 times more than us per home game played. As has been said this gap doesn't get filled with 25% more seats or 10% SC increases.
World class hospitality, with world class prices, more stadium events, and big-ticket pre-(and nowadays mid-) season tours do help fill the gap. Plus more stuff to sell to our 2 million visitors (but not that bloody "Manchester Egg")
I say we also build a 40k seater 3d open-air cinema and charge twenty quid to watch the game on campus, but not live. Just need Sky's agreement now :)

[Niall Quinns Discopants]

I think i've mentioned this before but a mate of mine in construction of this scale says that it would probably cost more to build a third tier than knock it down and start again

Depends if it was designed for future expansion. I had heard it's the same design as the emirates but without the third tier all the way round.

However, before we moved in I asked John Wardle at a City branch do if it could be expanded, as apparently the stadium of light was built that way, so they could cheaply increase the number of seats and he said no, and sort of laughed off the need to ever do it.

I think the plans spurs had, with a massive tier at one end would be the way we'd go, as it'd allow a hotel and conference venue to be built in. More seats and more revenue

I thought I saw on that massive thread on BM that has finally died, that it is possible to build a third and/or even 4th tier using some sort of cantilever style. IE the weight would not be supported by the existing structure but by by a new arrangement. Now I may be mis-remembering this a bit, but it was an engineer who was suggesting it. Unfortunately I am not, so I dont know how feasible this is.

I happen to be and I think I've explained this about hundred million times before.

The design of the ground is actually extremely clever in that the current stadia stands on it's own on the ground but so do the concourse towers. Meaning if we were to add extra tiers they could easily be supported by steelworks of concourse towers rather than existing ground. Visually you wouldn't notice any difference from "normal" expansions. It's not cheap and what would make it especially expensive would be demanding timescale to do most of the work during summer (essentially two and a half months).

What I THINK will happen though is what has been suggested above. I think they will build a massive expansion standing on it's connected to the current structure including hotel and/or casino and/or whatnot and on top of that structure there would be a new stand. There's numerous of reasons why this would make sense. A) it could be built independently without any need for tight time scale B) they are looking to improve the are anyway so it would be one massive project that would solve numerous of issues C) only one building permission from the council D) one main constructor and design team for whole project.

Now I'd like to think I know thing or two about big building sites. These things take years and years of development and design. Permissions and contractor selection take time as well. Now I seem to remember we have hired couple of architects already for the project and I think they are making sketches as we speak. I think numerous different options will be analysed at this stage and in the end owner and board will make the final call.

[Socrates]

Imo, the expansion is most likely to be done as part of the development around the ground. We surely can't build that, then start taking the roof off the ground; it wouldn't make sense ?

I don't know how far they want to go with the development nearby but it's not impossible to imagine the structure of the ground becoming part of it if they think it's worth doing.

I would imagine that the way to do it would be: try to build the waiting list to a genuine 15/20,000 then expand the ground & sell season tickets to all of them. Hence 56,000 season ticket holders, 15,000 or so seats available to members. Instantly you would have crowd averages similar to rags.

This is why we need to keep bringing in one or two top players for the next year or two imo, even if it upsets Platini. Once we get those fans in, we've cracked it.

How have we cracked it?

Even at 50 quid a time, 20,000 extra fans x 19 only equates 180,000 extra visitors paying a total of £9m of additional matchday revenue over the season. It's just not worth the investment that would be needed to accommodate those extra 20,000 whichever way you look at it.

The only possible way would be if it were 20,000 hospitality seats at say 100quid a time, then it starts to make sense at 18m a year........except that even with the season tickets sold out, i guarantee there will be gaping voids of unsold corporate seats this year again - that market is going to need to drag the corporates away from old traffford where they have had a presence for the last 20 years, as we will be in direct competition with the rags for that type of business, and i expect we would have to win the league several times before we got a sniff of denting uniteds dominance in that area.

20,000 x 19 = 380,000 not 180,000...

[Socrates]

Without sounding like I'm stating the obvious, would there not likely be enough space on the land available to just build a new stadium adjacent to the existing one, then knock the old one down???

Wouldn't we have to buy the stadium off the council to be allowed to knock it down?

Hmmm, yes and no. I guess that we could either do that or grant them some kind of equivalent freehold interest in the new stadium (ie. keep paying them what we've been paying to date per year) or just get their agreement that we can knock it down and rebuild another. Ultimately the stadium and land is never going to revert to them as we'll always be using it for football.

The council's interest is in getting the income and, most importantly, the economic stimulus that City the club and the football team brings to Manchester. It's neither here nor there to them in real terms whether we knock it down IMO

You are forgetting it was built with a huge Sport England grant. Knocking it down would trigger repayment of that money.