Butts Park Arena is new home (9 Viewers)

[eastwoodsdustman]

Exactly. Based on what we know we can achieve in terms of crowds in the championship we're going to rob ourselves of £1.9m - £3m in ticket revenue every season, not including cup games. We're going to have to be selling an awful lot of pie's to be better off and that's even before you consider the extra debt of the cost of redeveloping the site on top of the historic debt. A 12-15k stadium just doesn't add up.

It's worth pointing out that we're actually in a good position to be a championship club as early as next season. The butts proposal might not be viable before a brick is laid.

What do we know Tony? that we 'could' get 30000 fans come to a game? That we might get 13000 coming to every game?
The atmosphere at the Ricoh has been shite up until this season when they moved everyone into the one stand. Why bother making the same mistakes again?
People will enjoy it more if the atmosphere is better and be more likely to go back to watch games.
The club needs to cater for its supporters not some 'jonny come lately' who wants to see Man Utd, Liverpool or gets a sniff of a trip to a cup final and turns up once every 4 or 5 years.

 

---

[skybluetony176]

Potential customer base means very little if it only turns up once in 5 years. I'm a potential lottery winner but guess what? It isn't going to happen.

Well. There's only one certainty with the lottery. If you don't buy a ticket you can't win. What's being suggested means that we haven't bought a ticket.

 

[skybluetony176]

Where does it stop though? Should we build a 50k stadium so we aren't ruling out champions league?

There's a difference if we had 32k every week and downsize compared to being a third full every week and downsizing.

Now you're just being stupid.

You look at the history of the club and it's demographic. I'm not even suggesting that we need a 32k stadium, I'm suggesting 20k with the potential to rise to at least 25k.

We're in a strong position to be in the championship as early as next season and we know it's possible to get £20k at that level consistently. Are you seriously suggesting that building a 12-15k stadium and loosing 5-8k a game overnight is a good idea?

 

[chiefdave]

Here's a conspiracy theory for you.

SISU want to sell but without a ground can't find a buyer. They also can't afford / won't pay for land or a stadium.

So imagine they come up with plans for a new stadium at the Butts. Don't need to buy land, can whack in planning application pretty easily and relatively cheaply.

So in 6 months time we could have a Championship side running at break even in the process of building a new city centre ground. Seems to me that might be a more attractive proposition to a potential new owner and can be achieved at little cost to SISU.

 

[jimmyhillsfanclub]

What do we know Tony? that we 'could' get 30000 fans come to a game? That we might get 13000 coming to every game?
The atmosphere at the Ricoh has been shite up until this season when they moved everyone into the one stand. Why bother making the same mistakes again?
People will enjoy it more if the atmosphere is better and be more likely to go back to watch games.
The club needs to cater for its supporters not some 'jonny come lately' who wants to see Man Utd, Liverpool or gets a sniff of a trip to a cup final and turns up once every 4 or 5 years.

Exactly.

 

[Terry Gibson's perm]

Look at this seasons championship averages:

Derby 29,166
Brighton 23,921
Leeds 22,703
Middlesbrough 22,429
Sheff Wed 21,267
Forest 20,110
Wolves 20,010

There isn't another team over 19K.

i don't think we would be over 20k if we were there either apart from the big games.

 

[Nick]

Now you're just being stupid.

You look at the history of the club and it's demographic. I'm not even suggesting that we need a 32k stadium, I'm suggesting 20k with the potential to rise to at least 25k.

We're in a strong position to be in the championship as early as next season and we know it's possible to get £20k at that level consistently. Are you seriously suggesting that building a 12-15k stadium and loosing 5-8k a game overnight is a good idea?

Yes if we got promoted this season and in 5 years or whatever the stadium is going to take it is 15k I'd agree.

If we got promoted during the build then have plans in place for that happening.

 

[Speedies_Chips]

Here's a conspiracy theory for you.

SISU want to sell but without a ground can't find a buyer. They also can't afford / won't pay for land or a stadium.

So imagine they come up with plans for a new stadium at the Butts. Don't need to buy land, can whack in planning application pretty easily and relatively cheaply.

So in 6 months time we could have a Championship side running at break even in the process of building a new city centre ground. Seems to me that might be a more attractive proposition to a potential new owner and can be achieved at little cost to SISU.

Despite SISU's many fault I don't think they would even come up with a plan like that and expect it to work. That sounds like a 'cunning' plan that only Baldrick would come up with.

 

[skybluetony176]

What do we know Tony? that we 'could' get 30000 fans come to a game? That we might get 13000 coming to every game?
The atmosphere at the Ricoh has been shite up until this season when they moved everyone into the one stand. Why bother making the same mistakes again?
People will enjoy it more if the atmosphere is better and be more likely to go back to watch games.
The club needs to cater for its supporters not some 'jonny come lately' who wants to see Man Utd, Liverpool or gets a sniff of a trip to a cup final and turns up once every 4 or 5 years.

I thought the problem was a lack of revenue limiting our playing budget not the atmosphere?

12-15k is going to hit the playing budget in the championship, crowds will dwindle, we'll drop a league, optomism will diminish, crowds will drop, playing budget will come down etc. etc.

It's commiting the club to a downward cycle. Why would you support that?

 

[oldskyblue58]

The thought of a central football stadium for CCFC is appealing isn't it. Something to get behind or even hide behind. Had to laugh at the LR comment about perhaps building an underground car park though..... the cost would be horrendous imo. The news has to have come sourced from CCFC or CRFC doesn't it

As mentioned earlier there was planning approved in 2003 and lapsed in 2008

http://planning.coventry.gov.uk/portal/servlets/AttachmentShowServlet?ImageName=10989 hopefully this link works

It was for a Rugby stadium with three stands and a business centre, student homes and parking. The details are not very specific in terms of capacity but it is hard to think that a Rugby ground at that time would be looking at 15000. But it also doesn't state whether it was an all seater stadium - at the moment for football stadia it has to be doesn't it?

There would appear to be a lot of restrictions and covenants but that I would guess is quite normal. It does highlight some of the issues then and with the other developments that have happened since then the issues may have got more complicated - not saying insurmountable but surmountable usually takes a lot of money

Could there be significant income derived from the non playing parts of the stadium? If so how would they be split by the joint venture partners. It cant be 100% of the 365 day income going to one party can it?

If this is a serious plan, what is to stop Wasps now saying go on then but this is the deal till you go take it or leave it? Where could CCFC go to play and still have 12000 fans? Why do Wasps need to give favourable terms? In the scheme of things they don't earn much from CCFC. If no CCFC events then no income certainly but equally no costs either, the life of pitch extended and there may be opportunities to put on other events. You see a perceived strong negotiating position could also be a weak one. Too many people concentrate on the top line (well its where we are directed to look isn't it) but the thing that breaks a company in the end is its cashflow or profitability. If dealing with CCFC is cashflow neutral or even negative at the moment then there is potential for problems and CCFC have little room for movement. That all worries me

If the Butts project is the plan and fans get behind it then people might not like it but cant complain if the Ricoh is rebranded to suit Wasps in the meantime. CCFC are only temporary if the new stadium is the objective

Naming rights there may or may not be a problem relating to CCFC staying at the Ricoh - it depends who is making the claim I guess. But what it probably doesn't mean is that there will be no naming rights income - it might not be as much that's all. I doubt it will be a total loss. I would also guess that other rights/sponsorship/TV monies have increased considerably over last season so the hardship is it so great?

If crowds stay at 12000 for CCFC then that represents approx. 20% of total Ricoh footfall. That has value certainly. But then you need to ask what income is derived from that footfall. according to Wasps last accounts F&B is approx. 4% of turnover from all events. There is the CCFC rent of course but income from sponsorship/naming etc already was in place so CCFC has no current effect on that. A lot of those deals have changed and been replaced. Its really only the stadium name that's left it would seem. Say 1m per year with CCFC or 0.8m per year without it isn't massive numbers. Naming rights are done on what is not some pie in the sky hope of success. CCFC are a L1 team with hopes of success but a history of failure. CCFC are going to have to be there for what? the next 5 years? Where else are they going to go?

What would the naming rights be at the Butts arena? Again what other incomes? Wasn't the project supposed to be financed on the back of other elements it would seem that has changed. Things can and do change though as opportunities open or close

Interest payments/bonds. These amount to 2.275m per year for Wasps. First 6 months interest payable today I believe. The Bonds are repayable 2022 and currently trading at a premium (have done for all but a couple of days since issue) Do they need to repay in 2022 or could they issue more or even convert to float as a public company. ACL in 2011 paid out 1.7m in loan & interest payments on a turnover of 6.5m. The risk has been spread not just to fans but financial institutions in the most part. Is the pressure that great financially? If the team can even just breakeven in their profits then the problem is? CCFC has interest to pay too. It has interest bearing loans from ARVO. That interest might not be actually paid over but rolled up but it then becomes more debt plus add to that the hidden debt accumulating each year at a rate of £9m due on the preference shares.

All I am saying really is that things are never so clear cut. Nothing has been under the SISU tenure and I see no reason why that is going to change

I do hope we are not going back to all the silly games we used to have in the press again. Where the various parties give interviews/comments etc designed to paint particular unfavourable pictures. If there is a deal to be done at the Ricoh or at a new site just get on with it and do it

Not sure this coming out in the press just now is a good thing

Just thoughts - others will have different opinions

 

[SkyBlue_Bear83]

I would say that there is more chance of someone being interested if we had a long term deal at a decent rent at the Ricoh than having to also pay for a ground that isn't good enough to take us forward.

There are a lot of clubs that rent their grounds. Are you saying that none of these have ever been taken over?

Oh there would likely be people interested, problem is what sort of buyer would you be attracting? Most likely another idiot looking to chance their arm for a quick pay day.

 

[Astute]

Look at this seasons championship averages:

Derby 29,166
Brighton 23,921
Leeds 22,703
Middlesbrough 22,429
Sheff Wed 21,267
Forest 20,110
Wolves 20,010

There isn't another team over 19K.

Great word that. Averages. The Saturday games make up for the midweek lower gates. Then you lose a fair bit for segregation. And we are also talking about if a 12k to 15k stadium would be big enough. This would put us on a par with Brentford and Rotherham. Add these to Loftus road and you have nearly half of the clubs with either over 20k average or that can't hold 20k. Then you have the stadiums that hold just over 20k. So with segregation would be 20k max. Then you have to sell all the away tickets for the blocks you allow them to be able to get anywhere near the 20k.

What we would need would be a 20k stadium that could be expanded at a later date. Not a 15k max stadium with no chance of expanding.

 

[stupot07]

i don't think we would be over 20k if we were there either apart from the big games.

We wouldn't, in the championship we'd be getting 14-16k regularly with the odd big game or local derby 18-20k


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

 

[skybluetony176]

Yes if we got promoted this season and in 5 years or whatever the stadium is going to take it is 15k I'd agree.

If we got promoted during the build then have plans in place for that happening.

If we get promoted during the build we're building a white elephant. We'd have to start the planning process all over again and get approvals, that could take years. In the meantime we've bitten of our noses to spite our face and lost millions of the playing budget because we can't sell 20k of tickets and we end up back in league one. Oh we're back in league one, we don't need a 20k stadium anymore. That's the cycle we're looking at by not starting as we mean to go on. Unless SISU put large equity stakes in to keep the playing budget up enough to give us a chance of staying in the championship. I cant see that happening. Can you?

 

[Astute]

Here's a conspiracy theory for you.

SISU want to sell but without a ground can't find a buyer. They also can't afford / won't pay for land or a stadium.

So imagine they come up with plans for a new stadium at the Butts. Don't need to buy land, can whack in planning application pretty easily and relatively cheaply.

So in 6 months time we could have a Championship side running at break even in the process of building a new city centre ground. Seems to me that might be a more attractive proposition to a potential new owner and can be achieved at little cost to SISU.

So we would need an owner happy to pay SISU what they want for our club and happy to pay for a stadium to be built that isn't big enough?

 

[Nick]

If we get promoted during the build we're building a white elephant. We'd have to start the planning process all over again and get approvals, that could take years. In the meantime we've bitten of our noses to spite our face and lost millions of the playing budget because we can't sell 20k of tickets and we ebd up back in league one. Oh we're back in league one, we don't need a 20k stadium anymore. That's the cycle we're looking at by not starting as we mean to go on. Unless SISU put large equity stakes in to keep the playing budget up enough to give us a chance of staying in the championship. I cant see that happening. Can you?

No because you would surely plan for the different outcomes from the start?

You wouldn't just get planning for 12k, designs for 12k etc and then start building and if we got promoted knock it down and start again.

Common sense would say there would be planning and building plans for different outcomes?

 

[chiefdave]

No because you would surely plan for the different outcomes from the start?

You wouldn't just get planning for 12k, designs for 12k etc and then start building and if we got promoted knock it down and start again.

Common sense would say there would be planning and building plans for different outcomes?

I would have thought you start with plans for 15K and also get planning permission for an expansion to 20K. If the expansion is quick and easy to do then should it be required, thanks to promotion, prior to the initial build being completed you could just have a plan to make it part of the initial build.

 

[oldskyblue58]

Just to give an idea of what may or may not be possible:

View attachment 4789

The Den has a 20,146 capacity.

View attachment 4790

20,520 capacity at the Liberty Stadium.

Problem might not be the area but the height of those stands if placed at the Butts

Swansea btw have permission to increase to 32k. When I went past it last year it didn't seem to impinge on much housing around it

 

[Nick]

I would have thought you start with plans for 15K and also get planning permission for an expansion to 20K. If the expansion is quick and easy to do then should it be required, thanks to promotion, prior to the initial build being completed you could just have a plan to make it part of the initial build.

Exactly, you wouldn't knock it down and go back to planning permission stage.

 

[Astute]

No because you would surely plan for the different outcomes from the start?

You wouldn't just get planning for 12k, designs for 12k etc and then start building and if we got promoted knock it down and start again.

Common sense would say there would be planning and building plans for different outcomes?

And common sense would also be building on land that is big enough to expand when needed.

 

[skybluetony176]

No because you would surely plan for the different outcomes from the start?

You wouldn't just get planning for 12k, designs for 12k etc and then start building and if we got promoted knock it down and start again.

Common sense would say there would be planning and building plans for different outcomes?

If they were planning for different outcomes from the start the words 12-15K wouldn't have been mentioned in the first place. It would be 20k with potential fo expansion.

 

[Otis]

I know we are in the 3rd tier of football and getting 11000 fans each week, but we weren't getting much more than 14-15000 in the championship after the novelty of moving to the Ricoh had worn off and even when we were in to premier league/first division attendances weren't that much higher.
Would we need another white elephant of a ground that holds twice the amount that we need again?

But no-one is saying build a 30,000 seater stadium now, they're just saying we need somewhere that has the ability to expand to that if needed.

No point in getting a 15,000 seater stadium if that's all it's going to be. We get to the Premier and it's not going to be anywhere near enough. You have to also remember we were and have continued to be a club very much on the decline for the past 15 years or more. We get to the Premier in the next 5 years or so and we are going to be very much a club on the rise.

Makes a big difference.

No-one is saying build a 30,000 seater stadium now necessarily, just that we need that option. We have proved that we can get 30,000 for big games. We dig ourselves into a hole with a 15,000-18,000 seater with no room for expansion, then we are shooting ourselves in the foot.

 

[skybluetony176]

Exactly, you wouldn't knock it down and go back to planning permission stage.

Which could take years. In the mean time we will need equity stakes from SISU to keep the playing budget up to maintain championship status. That clearly isn't going to happen. So best case scenario is we end up in leagye one with a newly expanded stadium to 20K. Why not just do that in the first place?

 

[oldskyblue58]

Thing about taking an outline of another stadium is that you are not necessarily taking the whole footprint of that stadium.

 

[martcov]

Great word that. Averages. The Saturday games make up for the midweek lower gates. Then you lose a fair bit for segregation. And we are also talking about if a 12k to 15k stadium would be big enough. This would put us on a par with Brentford and Rotherham. Add these to Loftus road and you have nearly half of the clubs with either over 20k average or that can't hold 20k. Then you have the stadiums that hold just over 20k. So with segregation would be 20k max. Then you have to sell all the away tickets for the blocks you allow them to be able to get anywhere near the 20k.

What we would need would be a 20k stadium that could be expanded at a later date. Not a 15k max stadium with no chance of expanding.

Average is what it says. To get an average of 20000, you have to have a higher capacity - at least 25000, to make up for the below average attendances ( as you say about midweek games ).

 

[Captain Dart]

I know we are in the 3rd tier of football and getting 11000 fans each week, but we weren't getting much more than 14-15000 in the championship after the novelty of moving to the Ricoh had worn off and even when we were in to premier league/first division attendances weren't that much higher.
Would we need another white elephant of a ground that holds twice the amount that we need again?

Classic mistake to look at averages, the crowd sizes vary. Some are small like the first rounds of the paint pot cup and some can will be larger like a cup draw against a big team. If a stadium is 15K then the average will be somewhat less. City sometimes get a 30K crowd, it has happened several times, also we used to get 20K in the Championship.

Here are the historical attendances http://www.european-football-statistics.co.uk/attnclub/covc.htm

 

[Grendel]

Classic mistake to look at averages, the crowd sizes vary. Some are small like the first rounds of the paint pot cup and some can will be larger like a cup draw against a big team. If a stadium is 15K then the average will be somewhat less. City sometimes get a 30K crowd, it has happened several times, also we used to get 20K in the Championship.

Here are the historical attendances http://www.european-football-statistics.co.uk/attnclub/covc.htm

No it hasn't

 

[Captain Dart]

Just to give an idea of what may or may not be possible:
The Den has a 20,146 capacity.

20,520 capacity at the Liberty Stadium.

All very well, but where is the parking and that footprint bleeds out over other owners land. It just does not work on closer examination.

 

[chiefdave]

All very well, but where is the parking and that footprint bleeds out over other owners land. It just does not work on closer examination.

I suspect archtects and planners use a more sophisticated method than copying a ground on Google Maps and pasting it into a new location. The point is the area available may well work for a 20K plus ground.

There's plenty of grounds that have extremely limited parking. Personally I wouldn't rule it out just on the basis that there's less parking spaces than you'd like.

 

[Astute]

No it hasn't

So you agree that the Butts site isn't big enough then?

 

[Astute]

I suspect archtects and planners use a more sophisticated method than copying a ground on Google Maps and pasting it into a new location. The point is the area available may well work for a 20K plus ground.

There's plenty of grounds that have extremely limited parking. Personally I wouldn't rule it out just on the basis that there's less parking spaces than you'd like.

Old grounds didn't need parking or other things that new grounds need. For instance road infrastructure is now looked at. And there is no chance of a 20k stadium fitting in that small plot. And what about the 365 revenue that we keep getting told about?

 

[Grendel]

So you agree that the Butts site isn't big enough then?

No I'm saying we haven't had 30,000 crowds several times.

 

[Astute]

No I'm saying we haven't had 30,000 crowds several times.

So you are saying that the Butts site is big enough then?

 

[Grendel]

So you are saying that the Butts site is big enough then?

I would say a capacity of 15 - 20,000 is commercially workable.

 

[Astute]

I would say a capacity of 15 - 20,000 is commercially workable.

So you are saying that a 20k stadium would fit on the Butts site?

Most agree that we could get by with a 20k stadium. We would be able to get about 18k of home and away supporters in. What has been said in the main on this thread is that the Butts isn't big enough. That is because it isn't.