Butts park arena? (4 Viewers)

[Nick]

Will they explain what their interest is they are protecting?

 

---

[Senior Vick from Alicante]

So what is in it for CRFC?

Intrigue, it may be a double bluff. CRFC could want to force Sisu's hand to see if any preliminary conversations are going to lead to anything. Or if your really in to conspiracy theories then Wasps could have asked CRFC to make the plans known to force Sisu to negotiate the Ricoh lease as its all gone quiet on extending the current two years, if it were to happen Wasps have time to see if their is another sporting tenant willing to contribute.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Will they explain what their interest is they are protecting?

That is what I'd like to know.

I can actually think of some interests that don't reflect on trying to block the football club but... I'd rather they came up with those themselves

I would, however, rather focus on today's statement about a clean slate, personally. Hopefully that's the truth, and this email is today's chip paper.

 

[torchomatic]

It's not even a bluff, it's a double bluff!

 

[ajsccfc]

The triple bluff will be when someone goes past the Butts and finds there's another Ikea being built there.

 

[torchomatic]

The triple bluff will be when someone goes past the Butts and finds there's another Ikea being built there.

That could be Butt Fluff.

 

[Gazolba]

Calm down everyone. It's never going to happen just like the new stadium is never going to happen.

 

[stupot07]

What a joke, looks like the council are trying to force the Ricoh as the only professional football venue in the city. Not looking likely they will ever help the club find a viable site within the city for a new ground.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[oldskyblue58]

If it happens its a great idea
But
It will require more than just building a stadium. There will need to be infra structure improvements, road improvements etc. Improvements to bus and rail links coincide with match days or are viable 7 days per week. Yes it will bring people in to the City which is good news, but sorry CD it is going to need new car parking the existing 8000 you identify wont be enough to take the extra traffic imo.

Now it is surely not beyond the wit of man for that to be sorted but it is going to need more than a will to do it (however a good starting point that is). Trouble is that all means (a) finance and (b) joined up thinking between more than CRFC , CCFC and CCC for it to work well. That has to be a concern doesn't it?

I know Jon S says it will be all private money but I do not see how it will be given the other issues to be addressed. That could add massively to the total cost. Who is expected to build say the extra car parking?

The stadium. Wont having to excavate yards downwards greatly add to the overall cost and therefore reduce the return on capital ? increase the payback period? add to the interest charges? A capacity of 15000 at present is not far off requirement for what we are. How long and how much to add on say 5000 capacity and if Jon S wants other stuff there will that restrict what can be done? Also the natural first step wont be to add on a build it will be to take a premium on ticket prices wont it?

All just thoughts and it is obviously only early days in the life of this potential project. So its wait and see for me

 

[Nick]

What a joke, looks like the council are trying to force the Ricoh as the only professional football venue in the city. Not looking likely they will ever help the club find a viable site within the city for a new ground.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Surely they can't do that, they don't own acl now?

 

[chiefdave]

What is it's position?

Firmly in Wasps arse by the sound of it. I'm struggling to think of any valid reason for such a clause. Look forward to an explanation from CCC.

 

[dongonzalos]

Broken by Cov RFC, why would they do it?

I would prefer the Butts location.
Apart from the 25k capacity.
However I can't believe the rugby club would break ithe news without checking with SISU first
Not exactly great for the partnership if they did.
Unfortunately I think it maybe about having leverage before agreeing a long term deal with Wasps.
Just wish we would get on and get it signed if that's the way we have to go.

 

[Nick]

Firmly in Wasps arse by the sound of it. I'm struggling to think of any valid reason for such a clause. Look forward to an explanation from CCC.

It's ok the telegraph will have the exclusive as soon as the council send them what to say over

 

[Nick]

I would prefer the Butts location.
Apart from the 25k capacity.
However I can't believe the rugby club would break ithe news without checking with SISU first
Not exactly great for the partnership if they did.
Unfortunately I think it maybe about having leverage before agreeing a long term deal with Wasps.
Just wish we would get on and get it signed if that's the way we have to go.

Can't sign anything with the council blocking it can we?

 

[torchomatic]

It's ok the telegraph will have the exclusive as soon as the council send them what to say over

Ah shit. Germany have invaded Poland. What would we do without the CT?

 

[Grendel]

But if you read what has been said here they are talking about considerably less than 25,000.

That sounds to me like it may be much nearer to 15,000 than to 25,000.

I really don't see why this is such a big issue for you?

 

[Otis]

Capacities:

Just a few here. Can't be arsed to go through a whole stack of them, but .....

Arsenal - 60,000

Villa - plans to increase to 50,000

Chelsea - plans to increase to 60,000

Palace - 26,000

Everton - 40,000

Leicester - plans to increase to 42,000

Liverpool - 58,000

Man City - plans for 61,000

Man U - 76,000

Newcastle - 52,000

Norwich - plans to increase to 35,000

Southampton - 32,500

Stoke - plans to increase to 30,000

Sunderland - 49,000

West Bromwich - plans to increase to 30,000

Blackburn - long term plans to increase to 41,000

Bolton - 28,700

Bristol C - 27,000, plans to increase to 30,000

Brighton - can be expanded to 30,000

Cardiff - 35,000, can be expanded to 60,000

Charlton - plans for increase to 31,000, with potential to go to 40,0000

Fulham - plans to increase to 31,000

Hull - can be expanded to 45,000

MK -32,000, can be expanded up to 50,000

Barnsley - can be expanded up to 40,000

Now I know we obviously can't compete with the Man U's and Chelsea's and Arsenal's of this world, but if we have any ambition about us at all we need to be able to compete with the Stoke's and the West Brom's and the Norwich's and the Charlton's and Blackburn's and Bolton's.

The talk here is a maximum of 25,000, but that it is likely to be much lower.

25,000 has to just about be the minimum I would say. If we want success and get success, demand could quickly outstrip availability.

15,000 is okay for League One apart from any big play-off/cup/title bearing games, but in League One playing the Birmingham's and Villa's and Wolves etc. we will easily surpass 15,000 and much likely be well over 20,000.

The talk of 25,000 as an absolute maximum and to be unlikely, just concern me.

We have success and do really well and 25,000 would a short term measure leaving us to look to move again.

I know people are desperate to get away from Wasps, but we can't be blinkered here.

Someone needs to seriously have a good look at sinking it, raising it up in the sky, or knocking stuff down to get us a stadium that can fulfill our needs for the next half century at least.

Sent from my Hudl 2 using Tapatalk

 

[chiefdave]

tbf, HR was there before planning (and people driving to games... or even owning cars for that matter!) became such an issue.

How many parking spaces are there at the Emirates or the Etihad for example (I have no idea but not a huge amount I'd suggest). It seems like people are trying to create issues for us that haven't been a problem for anyone else.

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

CCC. have final say on any buildings within City boundaries, and any permissions come from them directly.

 

[SkyBlue_Bear83]

Damian Gannon:

He said: “I understand that the relationship between CCFC and the Council has not been great but this presents a real opportunity for us to “press the reset button” on our relationship with them and work to produce an outcome that works for the football club as well as the local authority. It would seem churlish for the Council to reject such a proposal out-of-hand particularly as a move closer to the city centre so obviously fits in with what we have been trying to achieve over the past few years in terms of growing the city centre.

“I have written to the Football Club and the Rugby Club asking for a meeting so I can get a fuller appreciation of these proposals and how we can all work together to make our city prosper and our local sports team achieve their true potential.”

He said: “This is very exciting news not only for the Butts and Spon End but also for the city as a whole. There is significant potential to regenerate this area creating jobs and opportunities for local people.

“Whilst I understand it still early days and there is a-lot of work still to be done the proposals sound as though they fit very closely with the council’s political, economic and social objectives of focusing on growing the city centre and becoming a top-ten city. This proposal would bring thousands of people into the Butts and would have positive knock-on effects to local businesses in the city centre.”

Thats a better response , whether its genuine or not at least it shows some form of maintaining professionalism rather than the other smug sack of unprofessional shit Maton

 

[clint van damme]

one thing might be worth bearing in mind regarding capacity is I expect safe standing to be rolled out in England over the next few seasons. If it is it may be possible to increase capacity without increasing the stadium size.

I would like us to have a 30.000 capacity even if we've rarely needed it in my time supporting the club.

 

[chiefdave]

CCC. have final say on any buildings within City boundaries, and any permissions come from them directly.

No they don't, if they refuse you appeal to the secretary of state.

 

[Skyblueweeman]

Not that hard really SBWM. My health determines I can no longer work. Five, maybe ten minutes research usually suffices. It's also not that hard to actually know what you're attacking posts for! Simply read rather than attack because you don't like a poster

Sorry to hear about your health. I don't 'attack' your posts because I don't like you (I don't know you), I just seem to disagree on a lot that you say. Nothing more nothing less.

 

[AFCCOVENTRY]

Wasps deputy chief has just spoken about today's developments. He's happy for CCFC to stay but club is free to do what is best for them. It doesn't matter if CCFC leave the Ricoh.

 

[Otis]

I really don't see why this is such a big issue for you?

Because obviously if we have real success it won't be enough. It won't be anywhere near enough to compete at a high enough level.

15,000 will see us to the Championship, but then we would struggle to make any dent on that.

So many clubs are expanding. We need much bigger than 15,000. To me that is blatantly obvious.

 

[SkyBlue_Bear83]

What a joke, looks like the council are trying to force the Ricoh as the only professional football venue in the city. Not looking likely they will ever help the club find a viable site within the city for a new ground.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

All part of there city of rugby project, suspect they couldn't give a shit if we played at the Ricoh or went bust.

 

[fernandopartridge]

Capacities:

Just a few here. Can't be arsed to go through a whole stack of them, but .....

Arsenal - 60,000

Villa - plans to increase to 50,000

Chelsea - plans to increase to 60,000

Palace - 26,000

Everton - 40,000

Leicester - plans to increase to 42,000

Liverpool - 58,000

Man City - plans for 61,000

Man U - 76,000

Newcastle - 52,000

Norwich - plans to increase to 35,000

Southampton - 32,500

Stoke - plans to increase to 30,000

Sunderland - 49,000

West Bromwich - plans to increase to 30,000

Blackburn - long term plans to increase to 41,000

Bolton - 28,700

Bristol C - 27,000, plans to increase to 30,000

Brighton - can be expanded to 30,000

Cardiff - 35,000, can be expanded to 60,000

Charlton - plans for increase to 31,000, with potential to go to 40,0000

Fulham - plans to increase to 31,000

Hull - can be expanded to 45,000

MK -32,000, can be expanded up to 50,000

Barnsley - can be expanded up to 40,000

Now I know we obviously can't compete with the Man U's and Chelsea's and Arsenal's of this world, but if we have any ambition about us at all we need to be able to compete with the Stoke's and the West Brom's and the Norwich's and the Charlton's and Blackburn's and Bolton's.

The talk here is a maximum of 25,000, but that it is likely to be much lower.

25,000 has to just about be the minimum I would say. If we want success and get success, demand could quickly outstrip availability.

15,000 is okay for League One apart from any big play-off/cup/title bearing games, but in League One playing the Birmingham's and Villa's and Wolves etc. we will easily surpass 15,000 and much likely be well over 20,000.

The talk of 25,000 as an absolute maximum and to be unlikely, just concern me.

We have success and do really well and 25,000 would a short term measure leaving us to look to move again.

I know people are desperate to get away from Wasps, but we can't be blinkered here.

Someone needs to seriously have a good look at sinking it, raising it up in the sky, or knocking stuff down to get us a stadium that can fulfill our needs for the next half century at least.

Sent from my Hudl 2 using Tapatalk

All irrelevant as Coventry City haven't managed an average attendance of 25k or more since 1971, and in the last 25 years have had an average in excess of 20k on just 5 occasions, that's with an away allocation of circa 6k at the Ricoh and 4k at HR.

 

[Grendel]

N

CCC. have final say on any buildings within City boundaries, and any permissions come from them directly.

no they don't - interesting to see who is squirming at this news. Do you and Senior Thick share the same care home?

 

[Gaz]

In my opinion a 25k capacity stadium would be plenty for us at present and the near future.
I'd be happy with that because even if we do get a big game, the attendance goes back down again the next game anyway.

I like the sound of this move and for the first time in a while it's some positive news for us on a ground.

 

[torchomatic]

Because obviously if we have real success it won't be enough. It won't be anywhere near enough to compete at a high enough level.

15,000 will see us to the Championship, but then we would struggle to make any dent on that.

So many clubs are expanding. We need much bigger than 15,000. To me that is blatantly obvious.

Bournemouth have had massive success on 11K. So what if we start at 15K. In the last decade how many times have we needed the full capacity of the Ricoh? We have to start somewhere. I think a smaller capacity will drive the demand for tickets if we do well and that can only be a good thing. It might be an issue in a decade or three, but it's not an issue now, I don't think.

 

[the rumpo kid]

just on the parking issue , there are 480 public parking spaces already built between the butts and the education ombudsman HQ next door. anyway its all bollox.

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

No they don't, if they refuse you appeal to the secretary of state.

So what was the crap coming from SISU about CCC won't let us build a Stadium inside Coventry's boundary then. :facepalm:

 

[Grendel]

Because obviously if we have real success it won't be enough. It won't be anywhere near enough to compete at a high enough level.

15,000 will see us to the Championship, but then we would struggle to make any dent on that.

So many clubs are expanding. We need much bigger than 15,000. To me that is blatantly obvious.

The higher the leagues you go the less percentage of income is from fans

If demand is that high they could get a sell out of season tickets at full value. That is far more revenue than when we have ever made when at the Ricoh. If people don't commit early they miss out. Who cares.

 

[chiefdave]

There will need to be infra structure improvements, road improvements etc. Improvements to bus and rail links coincide with match days or are viable 7 days per week. Yes it will bring people in to the City which is good news, but sorry CD it is going to need new car parking the existing 8000 you identify wont be enough to take the extra traffic imo.

We go to some grounds that are pretty much up a country lane, the Butts is 350 yards from the ring road! A decent traffic management plan and you shouldn't have issues. As for bus and rail pretty much every bus service in the city goes to the city centre, similarly how many trains go to the main station compared to the Ricoh?

Lets look at parking. The Ricoh, with 32K capacity, in an area poorly served by public transport has 3K spaces. So lets proportionally reduce that and say initially there will be a need for 1.5K spaces, that doesn't even account for the likelihood that less people will drive as it is a more accessible location. So with 8K minimum parking spaces within walking distance unless they are operating currently at over 80% capacity we're no worse off. Again its about managing the existing facilities. There's probably other parking as well, where do all council and university employees park for a start?

Not to say there would't be issues to resolve but I'm not really seeing anything that couldn't be sorted relatively easily.

 

[oldskyblue58]

How many parking spaces are there at the Emirates or the Etihad for example (I have no idea but not a huge amount I'd suggest). It seems like people are trying to create issues for us that haven't been a problem for anyone else.

Emirates has next to no parking and Arsenal Fc advise against driving there. However it is surrounded by rail and underground links

Etihad has some parking but relies on other parking sites much the same way as the ones near prologis etc for the Ricoh

What about somewhere like Rotherham for a closer comparison? They rely on pay & display etc in the area.

Its all doable but......... needs joined up thinking