SkyscraperCity Forum banner

Which design do you prefer?

  • The KSS design

    Votes: 80 16.0%
  • The Populous design

    Votes: 420 84.0%

LONDON - Tottenham Hotspur Stadium / New White Hart Lane (62,850)

26M views 91K replies 1K participants last post by  sonicyouth 
#1 · (Edited by Moderator)

Tottenham Hotspur FC

2x League:
1951, 1961

8x Cup:
1901, 1921, 1961, 1962, 1967,
1981, 1982, 1991

4x League Cup:
1971, 1973, 1999, 2008

7x Supercup:
1921, 1951, 1961, 1962, 1967,
1981, 1991

1x UEFA Cup Winners' Cup:
1963

2x UEFA Europa League:
1972, 1984











 
See less See more
7
#3,861 ·
Indeed, there has been no promise of a capacity increase.

But I am confident that we have enough solid info to be sure that it is on the cards. It was first mentioned in a Supporters Trust report of one of their regular meetings with Daniel Levy, Donna Cullen et al. That's when we first heard the phrase, "modest increase". There was subsequently the occasional snippet from a reliable ITK (apparently, they do exist!) on stadium issues. Finally, we have the Haringey document which states that a further planning application from Spurs - regarding "material changes" to the stadium - will be forthcoming.

You're right to say that an increase in the proposed capacity would not necessarily translate into an increase in revenues. But I think that the FFP rules will still have caused something of a rethink from Spurs. The limited space on the site and the particular design of the stadium would mean that, once built, it is highly unlikely that capacity would ever be increased - even if it should become necessary. The costs would outweigh the benefit. So it's not hard to imagine why Spurs might now prefer to maximize the capacity, on a stadium with the same footprint, while we still can.

I don't think that anyone has suggested, at this stage, that the club is close to securing a naming rights deal. It would certainly help, though, if the team didn't seem so hell bent on throwing away Champions League qualification! Could make a big difference to the value of any deal.

As to the training ground, I would hope that it is completed by the end of June at the latest, since pre season training will start in early July.
This may be a pedantic point, Jim, but I don't think the advent of the FFP regs will have made any difference to the club's approach to stadium capacity. I may have this wrong, but, as far as I can see, the FFP regs allow stadium building costs to be subtracted from our balance sheet for the purposes of the break-even numbers. So any losses we make during stadium construction won't affect the calculation that determines our eligibility for UEFA competitions.

We will want to maximise the revenues from the stadium, FFP or no FFP. Hence we will determine the capacity according to well-established business principles.

The calculations will, in the end, be complex. It's quite possible that a certain optimism about capacity expressed at the THST meeting may have changed some months later. Who knows? We are passing through a turbulent economic period in which circumstances and forecasts change.

The point is not to increase the capacity 'while we still can' but to calculate the optimum capacity to maximise revenues.

I trust that any (small) changes to the interior stadium design are oriented to (a) maximising revenues (whether that involves an increased or, indeed, a decreased capacity) and (b) giving us more flexibility in terms of future changes in capacity.


I expect that the main priority for the academy and training ground is not pre-season training, but the issues related to our classification under the new Elite Player Performance Plan, which applies from the beginning of the 2012-13 season.
 
#3,862 · (Edited)
3. and third point would it not be wise of the club to build the single tier stand like the germans build there stadiums ie able to convert standing to seating just because you cant satnd in football at the moment doesnt mean in 10,20, 30 years that might not change in England again.

our kop stand will hold about 9 thousand people so if you had 2 standing for every seat that would be 18k people not bad, would be a hell of an atmosphere
This would be just great. I mistakenly thought that at Dortmund's stadium they allowed one person standing in each seat space, but according to Wiki It has a league capacity of 80,720 (standing and seated) and an international capacity of 65,718 (officially seats only)

There was some talk of this a few months ago in relation to Villa I think (I posted it then, although maybe on COYS) but that seems to have since been dismissed by the authorities
 
#3,866 ·
Since we were discussing it earlier... apparently our academy has played its last game at the Lodge. The plan is to move to the new facility at Bulls Cross, Enfield early next month!

(Not sure when the first team switches - late last year the plan was to move by the beginning of the 2012-13 season. Perhaps, it'll be sooner.)
 
#3,867 ·
what are peoples thoughts about the trophy thing around the emirates with the pictures of the cup and year won, you for or against it at our ground? could look good but will probs look like we are copying arsenal, surely better to build a new history in a new stadium
You're certainly on to something there.

We shouldn't do exactly what Arsenal have done. But the new stadium should absolutely incorporate clearly visible and identifiable references to the club's (and the original stadium's) past. We don't want a soulless bowl that could belong to any team that plays in white and blue.

would it not be wise of the club to build the single tier stand like the germans build there stadiums ie able to convert standing to seating just because you cant satnd in football at the moment doesnt mean in 10,20, 30 years that might not change in England again.

our kop stand will hold about 9 thousand people so if you had 2 standing for every seat that would be 18k people not bad, would be a hell of an atmosphere
Definitely a good idea - providing that it doesn't add hugely to the cost.

In the unlikely event that standing is ever allowed in the Premier League again, however, I think it likely that the authorities will err massively on the side of caution and will impose a limit of increasing capacity in standing mode by no more than 50%.
 
#3,868 ·
This may be a pedantic point, Jim, but I don't think the advent of the FFP regs will have made any difference to the club's approach to stadium capacity. I may have this wrong, but, as far as I can see, the FFP regs allow stadium building costs to be subtracted from our balance sheet for the purposes of the break-even numbers. So any losses we make during stadium construction won't affect the calculation that determines our eligibility for UEFA competitions.

We will want to maximise the revenues from the stadium, FFP or no FFP. Hence we will determine the capacity according to well-established business principles.
Absolutely - stadium construction and other such capital costs will not figure in FFP calculations.

The point I was making was that it will now be even more important that Spurs maximizes every possible revenue stream. Given the tight limitations of the space and the design of the new stadium, it is highly unlikely that capacity could or would ever be increased once it has been built. The introduction of the FFP rules might well have made the cost of including 5K extra seats (including 2K extra corporate seats) a gamble worth taking.

The point is not to increase the capacity 'while we still can' but to calculate the optimum capacity to maximise revenues.
The difficulty with that is that, as you say, the optimum capacity cannot really be calculated. It changes from one year to the next. What can be calculated with a degree of certainty, however, is that no subsequent capacity increase (given that it will inevitably be very limited by the lack of space) will be worth the cost.

I expect that the main priority for the academy and training ground is not pre-season training, but the issues related to our classification under the new Elite Player Performance Plan, which applies from the beginning of the 2012-13 season.
I wouldn't have thought that the club would want the upheaval of moving to the new training ground after pre season has already started. Best to get everyone settled at the new training ground from the off.
 
Top