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.