Is the Butts deal imminent? (16 Viewers)

[Gynnsthetonic]

don't know how many times I have to say it, there's hardly any pedestrian access! You're right about parking, plenty of options near by but 5,000 people trying to get under the railway bridge exit into Sovereign Road has the potential for some serious health and safety issues. This isn't insurmountable but again, are the parties involved willing to get together to both solve and fund these issues.

A bit like the railway subway at the Ricoh, think your making excuses, it isn't that great to exit the Ricoh!

 

---

[stupot07]

I've been away out of touch but having read this stuff through I think there is no possibility we will be going to the BPA any time soon. I said it long ago there simply is not the capacity to grow a big city club there. This club will get out of league 1 even with SISU in charge. In the Championship and beyond we will need capacity. The Ricoh is still the obvious choice. We are in a strong position there tbh. Wasp can not survive there long term without a supporting tenant in my opinion. Time will come when we are the focus there with 30k crowds and the pressure on Wasp to deal with 'ownership' rights will crop up again and again...particularly if we have new owners and are sitting in the Premier league or even holding steady in the Championship.They need us now and we can and should find a way to work together and believe ultimately they will.
The alternative is some sort of home at the BPA while we wait and see Wasp struggle with overhead. Then come pouncing back and try to win the Ricoh deal back...really? Even SISU can't be thinking of going down that kind of road again. The light in the tunnel has been on this last twelve months. TM and MV - finally a proper management team, we very nearly joined in the fun of promotion. SISU I believe will encourage them with one of the best budgets in the league this coming season (it doesn't take much to do that in league 1) and I honestly believe we will get promoted. 30k at the Ricoh come April time is not unlikely as fans interest peaks. And that's what we are as a club folks. We are not (I hope) going to condemn ourselves to the BPA and step backwards in time and start acting like we never were a premier league outfit for 34 years prior to our dramatic slide. If it were my business I would keep us at the Ricoh and aim for promotions. Let the rest take care of itself as the success accumulates. It was always going to be difficult for WASP to sustain the Ricoh and keep it for their sole use while ignoring a one team big city football club standing on the sidelines. For that they were naive and the council at the time stupid.

I think you should read some of OSBs posts. Wasps don't need us at the Ricoh, we're not in a strong negotiating position.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[chiefdave]

don't know how many times I have to say it, there's hardly any pedestrian access! You're right about parking, plenty of options near by but 5,000 people trying to get under the railway bridge exit into Sovereign Road has the potential for some serious health and safety issues. This isn't insurmountable but again, are the parties involved willing to get together to both solve and fund these issues.

I think I'm missing something here. Why is everyone going under a railway bridge? Looking on Google Maps one side of the ground would come out onto Butts Road and another onto Butts Park.

Don't we only have a tunnel, and further down a bridge for everyone coming from that side of the Ricoh?

 

[clint van damme]

A bit like the railway subway at the Ricoh, think your making excuses, it isn't that great to exit the Ricoh!

I think I'm missing something here. Why is everyone going under a railway bridge? Looking on Google Maps one side of the ground would come out onto Butts Road and another onto Butts Park.

Don't we only have a tunnel, and further down a bridge for everyone coming from that side of the Ricoh?

The difference with the Ricoh is there you can enter/exit all round the ground. Not the case at the Butts. And the underpass towards Tesco is a lot bigger, albeit with a set of stairs either side.

Butts park doesn't really have an exit other than the road that run parallel with it towards Chapelfields.
In my opinion the site really needs access to/from Albany Road that it doesn't currently have.

Again, it's not an insurmountable issue but it needs addressing, especially if we're hoping for crowds of 18,000 plus.

And I 'm, not making excuses, I would like it to happen, not that it matters what I want, but we need a coherent plan not a pie in the shy wish list.

 

[letsallsingtogether]

Well obviously, both scenarios are closely linked. I think I would rather listen to those involved than those like you, who are not.

As I said, might not happen. I for one, hope it does. I think the Club needs it to progress and to get its identity back.

15000 progress?
More embarrassing I would welcome it but needs to be 25000 from the off.

 

[Kingokings204]

I think you should read some of OSBs posts. Wasps don't need us at the Ricoh, we're not in a strong negotiating position.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

So you keep telling us but we have no other choice but to stay at the Ricoh. Do you accept this?

 

[martcov]

They need us sooooo much that they are refusing to negotiate and have not moved on any single point.
And Pax... there is more than one Wasp.

So, the negotiations are over. Is that a fact? Where did you get that information? If so, we have 2 years to solve all problems and get a stadium with a two tier stand and sunken pitch built - with the cooperation of people we are war with. The plans will have to be put in very quickly to achieve that. If this is going to go ahead, we can expect an announcement within 3 weeks.

 

[martcov]

Read Jan's post about Wasps, Ricoh and revenue on the SCG thread. There is no chance we are going to get a better deal. No chance of increased revenues. Without increased revenues then bargain basement players and selling of anyone decent who comes through the ranks. That is what our future will be if we stay and stagnate at the Ricoh. I don't want that, which is why I am hoping the BPA thing comes off. Yes, it will be a smaller capacity at the start but history shows we wouldn't sell that out very often. They talk of increasing capacity if we were successful, sounds good to me.

We do have two choices. You've made yours, I've made mine. However, it won't be up to us what happens anyway.

To base, or partly base your opinion on "talk" that "sounds good" is at best naive. How much talk - from all parties in this disaster - have we heard? Where are we now as a result of talk? Up until now we have heard nothing more than talk. I do believe that Rugby JS wants to get things done. How big a stadium he actually needs for the Rugby Club alone is a question. Having CCFC will mean a bigger stadium, but more problems in getting things done. I am still waiting to see the costings and proposed revenues - and how the revenues are shared between the Rugby club, their investors, SISU's investors and the club.

 

[torchomatic]

I do believe that Rugby JS wants to get things done. How big a stadium he actually needs for the Rugby Club alone is a question.

To base, or partly base your opinion on "talk" from "Rugby JS" is surely a little naive?

It seems you believe "talk" when it suits you. What were the chances of that?

 

[martcov]

To base, or partly base your opinion on "talk" from "Rugby JS" is surely a little naive?

It seems you believe "talk" when it suits you. What were the chances of that?

Rugby JS is in talks - real talks - as opposed to "talk". Millerchip has confirmed it. The Rugby club has outline permission for a 15000 rugby stadium. Rugby JS has a good CV - as posted by Old Fiver. The known facts fit with the talk of Rugby JS - as far as the Rugby club is concerned. The bit with the 25000 extension a la CCFC is at best a "possible", but apart from the possibility ( anything is possible ) and a bit of talk, there are no cross references from other sources. So unless something with outside confirmation comes in the next three weeks we will be left with just talk - and not for the first time.

 

[Samo]

So, the negotiations are over. Is that a fact? Where did you get that information? If so, we have 2 years to solve all problems and get a stadium with a two tier stand and sunken pitch built - with the cooperation of people we are war with. The plans will have to be put in very quickly to achieve that. If this is going to go ahead, we can expect an announcement within 3 weeks.

Where did I say there would be no further negotiations?

 

[stupot07]

So you keep telling us but we have no other choice but to stay at the Ricoh. Do you accept this?

There are always options, maybe not soon enough for 2 years time, but there are always options.

I accept that we will need to stay at the Ricoh longer than 2 years, but I don't accept thah long term this is our only option.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[Paxman II]

I think you should read some of OSBs posts. Wasps don't need us at the Ricoh, we're not in a strong negotiating position.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

I disagree.

 

[Paxman II]

There are always options, maybe not soon enough for 2 years time, but there are always options.

I accept that we will need to stay at the Ricoh longer than 2 years, but I don't accept thah long term this is our only option.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Well its the chicken and the egg really. the Ricoh is the only sensible option for a club the size of CCFC. That said any options that crop up are to be explored of course. But I'd rather see off the current owners who will not invest heavily enough to secure any stadium of the capacity needed going forward. Sit tight, negotiate further with WASP who will be glad of a tenant such as CCFC regardless of what many believe and see what comes our way.
In my mind i see an eventual participation in ownership of the Ricoh because I fail to see the sustainability of the place without us (well sustainable perhaps but not exactly adding to the coffers substantially) and at the very least could be seen as a detriment to the city not having it's only football club there. can you ever see anytime when WASP fill the stadium to capacity on a regular basis? With success on the pitch CCFC certainly could. Its not WASP problem but they would be wise to consider the benefits going forward with CCFC noting it will not always have the same owners...

 

[Kingokings204]

There are always options, maybe not soon enough for 2 years time, but there are always options.

I accept that we will need to stay at the Ricoh longer than 2 years, but I don't accept thah long term this is our only option.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

That's fine, that's all meant. After 2 years we have no option but to stay at the Ricoh. Long term anything is possible at this stage.

As paxman says I think wasps want us there and to be fairly successful, no I accept their business plan doesn't depend on us but why wouldn't you want the only football club in the city with potential not playing at the Ricoh 25-26 times a year. Well of course you would.

 

[martcov]

If we weren't at the Ricoh, someone at Wasps would say, let's get on to CCFC and see if we could do a deal... The boot would be on the other foot though and we would be in a better position. Maybe that is the ploy with the BPA anyway - as has already been mentioned.

 

[italiahorse]

What's the sunken pitch everybody keeps mentioning ?

 

[chiefdave]

What's the sunken pitch everybody keeps mentioning ?

The chap from CRFC said that if they lowered the pitch they could build bigger stands. Not sure how that works to be honest as unless you're overhanging the pitch how can you get any closer?

Its now a fact that it has to happen to get a decent capacity and will cost the GDP of a small country to do.

 

[Astute]

The chap from CRFC said that if they lowered the pitch they could build bigger stands. Not sure how that works to be honest as unless you're overhanging the pitch how can you get any closer?

Its now a fact that it has to happen to get a decent capacity and will cost the GDP of a small country to do.

The odds are that as there is a building right at the side of where they want to build they would be limited to what height they could build to. There is a right to light law amongst others that planning would have to get past. So if they started below ground level they would manage to get a bigger stand for the height allowed.

 

[Brylowes]

What's the sunken pitch everybody keeps mentioning ?

That would be "Bob Latchford"

Oh sorry!!
I thought you said "Drunken Bitch"

 

[chiefdave]

The odds are that as there is a building right at the side of where they want to build they would be limited to what height they could build to. There is a right to light law amongst others that planning would have to get past. So if they started below ground level they would manage to get a bigger stand for the height allowed.

The only thing that would have been there the required 20 years for right to light to apply would be the land registry wouldn't it? And that is at an angle so only really a corner goes towards the ground.

 

[The Reverend Skyblue]

Isn't Monacos ground built on top of a shopping centre. They could go down this route which will provide lots of rental revenue though obviously the height would hit planning problems.
I'm positive there is another ground in South America built like this also, I think Spurs new ground has a huge supermarket underneath it,though I may be mistaken.

We could have the first underground stadium if we have to dig down deep

 

[chiefdave]

We could have the first underground stadium if we have to dig down deep

Already been beaten to it. Google Doha Wall Stadium. Its done a really odd way though, it's 11K capacity but has a footprint of a far bigger stadium.

 

[Brylowes]

Call in Tony Robinson and his time team, tell em the BPA
Is built on an ancient monastic burial site, they'll have it
dug out in know time.

 

[Samo]

Call in Tony Robinson and his time team, tell em the BPA
Is built on an ancient monastic burial site, they'll have it
dug out in know time.

I'll dig the fucker out myself if it means we can move on!

 

[Brylowes]

I'll dig the fucker out myself if it means we can move on!

I dig your enthusiasm' sir' !

 

[Otis]

I'll dig the fucker out myself if it means we can move on!

I will chisel the headstone now for you.

Here lies Samo in his sunken crypt. He dug so deep he finally slipped. A thousand spades for 25,000 souls, futile effort for pointless holes.

 

[Samo]

I will chisel the headstone now for you.

Here lies Samo in his sunken crypt. He dug so deep he finally slipped. A thousand spades for 25,000 souls, futile effort for pointless holes.

Well you're no Byron Otis but very good nonetheless! Will you not be helping?

 

[Otis]

Well you're no Byron Otis but very good nonetheless! Will you not be helping?

Give me a yell when you are just short of Brisbane.

 

[wingy]

Don't know if this is the place but there are certain themes running through many threads., so access to streams and facilities, apparently that costs and Wasps sharing or buying out CCFC seems unlikely.
What about incremental stakes in our Club for exchanging benefits.

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

To base, or partly base your opinion on "talk" that "sounds good" is at best naive. How much talk - from all parties in this disaster - have we heard? Where are we now as a result of talk? Up until now we have heard nothing more than talk. I do believe that Rugby JS wants to get things done. How big a stadium he actually needs for the Rugby Club alone is a question. Having CCFC will mean a bigger stadium, but more problems in getting things done. I am still waiting to see the costings and proposed revenues - and how the revenues are shared between the Rugby club, their investors, SISU's investors and the club.

JS at CRFC has stated in

The chap from CRFC said that if they lowered the pitch they could build bigger stands. Not sure how that works to be honest as unless you're overhanging the pitch how can you get any closer?

Its now a fact that it has to happen to get a decent capacity and will cost the GDP of a small country to do.

Barcelona fc did it!....
History
First opening in 1957 with a friendly match between FC Barcelona and Legia Warsaw the stadium originally consisted of just two stands which were capable of seating around 60,000 supporters. Replacing the club’s former home, Camp de Les Corts, which had no room for further expansion, the stadium was originally called “Estadi del FC Barcelona”.

Costing 288 million pesetas which was more than three times larger than the initial budget, it wasn’t until Spain hosted the 1982 World Cup that the Nou Camp was expanded to a capacity of 80,000. Barcelona’s stadium hosted its first European Cup final in May 1972 between Rangers and Dynamo Moscow in the Cup Winners Cup, and has gone on to host several major finals since.

Perhaps most famous of all was the Champions League Final of the 1998/1999 season which saw Manchester United comeback to defeat Bayern Munch 2-1 after scoring two goals in injury time despite being outplayed over 90 minutes. Prior to this the Nou Camp hosted the 1989 final between AC Milan and FC Steaua București which was a much more one sided affair with the Italians dominating their opponents in a 4 nil victory.

The removal of the seats in the early 1990s initially reduced the capacity below 100,000 but renovation work which included the lowering of the pitch resulted in the reclamation of some seats. This ensured that Barca’s stadium would remain the largest in Europe ahead of Real Madrid’s rival Santiago Bernabéu and Espanyol’s Cornellà-el Prat.

In 2007 as part of the ground’s 50th anniversary the club commissioned prominent British architect Norman Foster to remodel the stadium but plans were shelved due to the onset of the global financial crisis in 2008. The project is now resurrected with the €600 million work set to begin in 2017 and be completed over a four year period by 2011.

 

[italiahorse]

The chap from CRFC said that if they lowered the pitch they could build bigger stands. Not sure how that works to be honest as unless you're overhanging the pitch how can you get any closer?

Its now a fact that it has to happen to get a decent capacity and will cost the GDP of a small country to do.

If there was a running track around the pitch you could do it, but simple trigonometry tells us that if leaving the stands in the same position and digging down reduces the pitch size.
Perhaps he is looking at it from a planning position where stand height to local area is important. Certainly could not increase capacity on same footprint.

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

If the pitch was turned 90 degrees at BPA. We could do a (Old Trafford Sir Alex Ferguson North Stand job) I know that stand holds 25.5k but no reason why not enough room to build a 8-10k stand out towards the main road. leaving another 3 stands holding approx 12-15k between them. Thoughts...

 

[wingy]

If the pitch was turned 90 degrees at BPA. We could do a (Old Trafford Sir Alex Ferguson North Stand job) I know that stand holds 25.5k but no reason why not enough room to build a 8-10k stand out towards the main road. leaving another 3 stands holding approx 12-15k between them. Thoughts...

Like Crewe Alexandre?

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

Like Crewe Alexandre?

Yes mate, very similar to Old Trafford, but not as big lol