daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy (aug.2, 2013) | DMCA policy | flipboard magazine

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > European Forums > UK & Ireland Architecture Forums > Cultural and Sporting Venues

Cultural and Sporting Venues From Football Stadiums to Opera Houses.



Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old October 29th, 2013, 07:34 PM   #721
JimB
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 8,290
Likes (Received): 513

Quote:
Originally Posted by BeestonLad View Post
If the rumours are true it sounds like a load of pie in the sky from Tottenham. I'm sure the NFL would want a franchise playing at Wembley, this crap about Wembley being too big is just nonsense. What's the point in taking a team away from one market and placing them into another if they aren't likely to sell a stadium like Wembley out for 8 games a year? Defeats the object.
Just to answer the bolded section:

Do you think that Spurs would abandon a stadium design that they had commissioned at great cost, and for which they already had planning permission, unless they had been given very firm indications of interest by NFL executives?

I'm not saying that this NFL stadium share will definitely happen but I think it's quite safe to say that it is definitely not "pie in the sky from Tottenham".
JimB no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
 
Old October 30th, 2013, 08:16 AM   #722
BeestonLad
PQS
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Abu Dhabi
Posts: 2,206
Likes (Received): 57

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimB View Post
Just to answer the bolded section:

Do you think that Spurs would abandon a stadium design that they had commissioned at great cost, and for which they already had planning permission, unless they had been given very firm indications of interest by NFL executives?

I'm not saying that this NFL stadium share will definitely happen but I think it's quite safe to say that it is definitely not "pie in the sky from Tottenham".
Well neither of us know the real reason behind abandoning the previous design. How about this theory, Spurs have so far managed to secure zero funding for the new stadium in over two years of trying, possibly due to them having unrealistic expectations of how much they can command. In almost desparation to they have latched on to the idea of the NFL wanting a London franchise and are trying to entice them to pay for the stadium. I still think that should the NFL decide on a London franchise then Wembley will be their first choice.

Anyway time will tell...
BeestonLad no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 31st, 2013, 11:48 AM   #723
SunnyCoast
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Brisbane/London
Posts: 69
Likes (Received): 25

Worth a read/view.

http://www.theguardian.com/football/...ess-demolition
__________________
'Callum Best is only famous because of his Dad....guess you could say the same about Jesus'. Carl Pilkington 06
SunnyCoast no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 20th, 2013, 11:17 PM   #724
I Beam Trembler
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 78
Likes (Received): 14

last design 56000. west ham 54000. gonna be second tier. spurs you need 70000 minimum with ability to grow. you have no catchment problem, you;re in the middle of a 12 million conurbation. spurs along with chelsea are the only clubs with the potential to top man u income wise over the next ten years.
I Beam Trembler no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 21st, 2013, 12:24 AM   #725
Splish
Registered User
 
Splish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Surrey, U.K.
Posts: 4,028
Likes (Received): 228

Splish no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 21st, 2013, 01:03 AM   #726
JimB
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 8,290
Likes (Received): 513

Quote:
Originally Posted by SunnyCoast View Post
That article (actually, series of three separate articles) was an amateurish hatchet job by the normally excellent David Conn.

So many basic errors.

So much tabloidesque sensationalism.

Much of it centred around the use of CPO's - which are standard procedure in pretty much every major urban development. It was noticeable that Conn never made a big song and dance about Arsenal serving many CPO's on businesses around the Emirates in order to facilitate their property development plans. Yet he slags off Spurs in three consecutive articles when Haringey council (not even Spurs, FFS!) are considering plans to serve CPO's on businesses on and around the High Road, Tottenham.

He also completely fails to acknowledge that all of these businesses will be fully compensated and found new - and possibly bigger and better - premises as close as possible to where they are now.

As to the council homes that will be demolished, they are butt ugly, 1960's concrete carbuncles. They will be replaced by superior, new homes. Conn fails to mention, obviously, that a survey of residents in these blocks showed that they were, by a large margin, in favour of the redevelopment plans.

As to the claim that Spurs are somehow being aided by the public purse.......sheer, halfwitted nonsense. Spurs will not now have to pay for local transport infrastructure upgrades, true. But why should they ever have been expected to pay for successive governments' (local and national) failure over many decades to invest in north Tottenham's infrastructure? West Ham will benefit from billions of public money spent on Stratford's infrastructure. Arsenal benefit from five tube stations on two tube lines (costing however many hundreds of millions) far closer to their stadium than Tottenham Hale is to WHL.

Yet Conn wants to whine about a comparatively paltry £16 million of public money being spent on north Tottenham's infrastructure? Fuck off.

It's true that, in some major developments, the developer is expected to contribute "planning gain" in the form of new roads, stations etc. But that's when you're talking about multi billion companies - like Westfield, for instance. Not when you're talking about a moderately sized company that will be straining every financial sinew as it is, just to pay for its new stadium.

It's a real shame that Conn let himself down so badly with this lame, agenda driven excuse of an article.
__________________

L8Hatter liked this post
JimB no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 21st, 2013, 01:10 AM   #727
JimB
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 8,290
Likes (Received): 513

Quote:
Originally Posted by I Beam Trembler View Post
last design 56000. west ham 54000. gonna be second tier. spurs you need 70000 minimum with ability to grow. you have no catchment problem, you;re in the middle of a 12 million conurbation. spurs along with chelsea are the only clubs with the potential to top man u income wise over the next ten years.
We'll have to wait to see what truth there is in these stories about a new stadium design and capacity increase. But even the original KSS design had already been reconfigured to accommodate 61K, if required.

There is a point at which having too large a capacity becomes counter productive in terms of attendances. If tickets are too easy to come by, fans will have less incentive to buy season tickets - preferring to buy on a game by game basis. And that will inevitably have an adverse effect on attendances for the less attractive fixtures.
JimB no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 21st, 2013, 01:23 AM   #728
Toadboy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Liverpool, in the North of England but not of it
Posts: 10,128
Likes (Received): 667

Quote:
Originally Posted by I Beam Trembler View Post
last design 56000. west ham 54000. gonna be second tier. spurs you need 70000 minimum with ability to grow. you have no catchment problem, you;re in the middle of a 12 million conurbation. spurs along with chelsea are the only clubs with the potential to top man u income wise over the next ten years.
Tottenham will sell tickets to Tottenham fans at £50 a pop with plenty of demand still not satisfied for most games.

West Ham will sell tickets for £20 to tourists for half their games and have big away crowds of 5k plus for the others.

Other than that I agree - Tottenham should go bigger, another candidate for safe standing and 60/65k on the same footprint?
__________________
Duh! Knows
Toadboy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 21st, 2013, 08:26 PM   #729
JimB
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 8,290
Likes (Received): 513

Quote:
Originally Posted by Toadboy View Post
Tottenham will sell tickets to Tottenham fans at £50 a pop with plenty of demand still not satisfied for most games.

West Ham will sell tickets for £20 to tourists for half their games and have big away crowds of 5k plus for the others.

Other than that I agree - Tottenham should go bigger, another candidate for safe standing and 60/65k on the same footprint?
I dunno, Toady.

I think we'll struggle to sell 60K tickets per game if there isn't some give on ticket prices.

We have something like 24K season ticket holders at present and a further 45K+ on the paid "waiting list", according to the club. There is also an unknown (to me, at least) number of paid up members who are not on the waiting list. If I had to guess, I'd say that they number 30-50K. Plus countless more casual fans and tourists, of course.

But in reality, many of those on the waiting list are only on it because it affords them booking priority for the biggest games. I'd be surprised if, once the new stadium is completed, more than half of them convert their place on the waiting list into an actual season ticket.

As to the more casual fans and tourists, they mostly want to attend the games that would sell out to members anyway.

There will be the Field of Dreams phenomenon for a season or two........if you build it, they will come. Just to see the new place. But once that is past? Unless something is done to improve the atmosphere or unless tickets are priced sensibly, I can envisage plenty of empty seats for cup games and even for the less glamorous PL games. £50 a pop will guarantee that that becomes reality.
JimB no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 22nd, 2013, 11:28 AM   #730
SteveAWOL
Registered User
 
SteveAWOL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Buckinghamshire
Posts: 169
Likes (Received): 21

According to http://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/memb...oyalty-points/ we currently have 21,890 season ticket holders plus a combined total of 72,288 Bronze and Lilywhite members (it doesn't specify how many of each though).

Like most of my mates, I've just got a Lilywhite membership as the handful of extra tickets they release to Bronze card holders barely makes it worth the extra cost when I know that there's absolutely no chance of me getting a season ticket until Spurs finally move into the new stadium.

Judging by the £hundreds some season ticket holders are charging for their seats on http://www.stubhub.co.uk/tottenham-hotspur-tickets/ it appears that merely being a season ticket holder can be a nice little money earner nowadays! Hopefully prices will return to closer to face value once we have the new stadium, as I used to be able to get seats for many of the Category A fixtures on the old Ticket Exchange but refuse to pay those massively inflated prices which don't even include StubHub' 15% commission (on top of the 12% they charge the seller as a handling fee).

I think that a 60ish thousand capacity will be adequate for the foreseeable future, as we should be able to sell out most Category A fixtures at full price and the club can offer more discounted family tickets for League Cup and Europa games which has the long term benefit of getting a new generation of fans hooked on Spurs.

Last edited by SteveAWOL; November 22nd, 2013 at 11:34 AM.
SteveAWOL no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 22nd, 2013, 12:23 PM   #731
Toadboy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Liverpool, in the North of England but not of it
Posts: 10,128
Likes (Received): 667

So what do you think, average after the initial surge settling at low/mid 50's? If so I'd take the 60k it should allow a walk up gate for some fixtures, the club to be creative with pricing but still insufficient for the big games so they can hedge there.

And to be honest it was the West Ham comparison I was targeting, Wet Ham have got a good following but they'll struggle to move much beyond 40k. the spare capacity will open them up to the tourist and casual football watcher market though - I know a few lads who go to Fulham to get their fix but support Liverpool, Everton, Man United and... Burnley!
__________________
Duh! Knows
Toadboy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 22nd, 2013, 03:43 PM   #732
kerouac1848
Registered User
 
kerouac1848's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: NW London
Posts: 2,758
Likes (Received): 269

Surely if the greater capacity means lower prices - or a package that is cheaper than the current lowest price one - that's a good thing? Everyone moans that crowds aren't diverse enough, and that the young and lower-income earners are priced out of matches.
kerouac1848 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 22nd, 2013, 04:18 PM   #733
Toadboy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Liverpool, in the North of England but not of it
Posts: 10,128
Likes (Received): 667

That's what I want Kerouac, a football club should have that. Football as a business however is lazy and risk averse.
__________________
Duh! Knows
Toadboy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 22nd, 2013, 04:32 PM   #734
SteveAWOL
Registered User
 
SteveAWOL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Buckinghamshire
Posts: 169
Likes (Received): 21

Quote:
Originally Posted by Toadboy View Post
So what do you think, average after the initial surge settling at low/mid 50's? If so I'd take the 60k it should allow a walk up gate for some fixtures, the club to be creative with pricing but still insufficient for the big games so they can hedge there.

And to be honest it was the West Ham comparison I was targeting, Wet Ham have got a good following but they'll struggle to move much beyond 40k. the spare capacity will open them up to the tourist and casual football watcher market though - I know a few lads who go to Fulham to get their fix but support Liverpool, Everton, Man United and... Burnley!
Yeah, Fulham allow "neutrals" to sit in the Putney Stand but it basically becomes the away end when Spurs visit and most other Premier League clubs I expect. Hopefully our new stadium won't need to have a neutral stand in order to sell all the tickets, although the more away fans the more raucous the atmosphere tends to be so maybe it would help dissipate the negative atmosphere that AVB recently alluded to.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kerouac1848 View Post
Surely if the greater capacity means lower prices - or a package that is cheaper than the current lowest price one - that's a good thing? Everyone moans that crowds aren't diverse enough, and that the young and lower-income earners are priced out of matches.
Lower ticket prices are good for us fans but not so good for the clubs finances I suppose, what with the Plc having to shell out £millions more to construct a larger stand which will take years longer to pay for itself when seats are cheap and full of people who are less likely to splash out on the exorbitantly priced food and drink.
SteveAWOL no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT +2. The time now is 01:22 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like v3.2.5 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu