LONDON | New Chelsea FC Stadium | 65,000 | Pre-planning

[Its AlL gUUd]

Originally Posted by Marky_boy

The atmosphere at Stamford Bridge is bad enough already, imagine another 40,000 seats, they would either be empty or filled with foreign day-trippers. 76,000 at Liverpool wouldn't be much better either.

ehh? The atmosphere at Stamford bridge is always pretty good tbh

[Toadboy]

Liverpools last three games, like all games, sold out (although Boro returned over 1,000 on the day), sell outs and turnstiles clicks are another thing which is why Newcastles claim of 99.9% attendance is bollocks.

Why do Man United fans seem to think they're the only club who'll ever shift tickets and always have done?

chelsea will move them for most games while football's 'trendy'.

[Schmeek]

I know this is supposed to be the chelsea thread, but I have to say that Liverpool pushing capacity up to 76k seems a little excessive, even for a club a their stature. I realise there are 30k odd still on the season ticket waiting list, but what people forget is that those who have season tickets don't make it to every game. I realise they 'lend' them to eager friends on these occasions, but the reason they can do this is because of the waiting list,and even then there wil still be inevitable empty seats hence the 99% stats. With the waiting list gone these seats (or a large proportion of them) will remain empty. I think they should not go beyond 70k, thus keeping a margin of competition for seats.
I love Liverpool and stood on the kop many times with my brother who is a fan, so have a soft spot for them, but still think supersizing can be a mistake.

[Scarecrow]

The thing is with the Redshite, the majority of their tickets are presold and already allocated. Thay sell the tickets, and the wealthy Toads sit on them to assure priority for the big games. They don't have to go to the match, just purchase the tickets so they can go to the big ones.

[Fanatic74]

where I could find any picture about the 'old style'(about 1985-1990) Stamford Bridge stadium?Thanks!!

[Jonny Gee]

[lewisskinner]

from http://www.oldfootballgrounds.co.uk/

[Fanatic74]

WOW!!

Thanks

[Wild@Heart]

Incredible to think that was only 7 years ago.

[KiwiBrit]

That's because it wasn't. I would say that picture is probably 15 years old at least.

[Metrolink]

Ah, remember Chelsea's crowds (and Newcaslte's for that matter) attendences in the late 80's / early 90's.

[potto]

anyway what is wrong with over-capacity?! There will always be a couple of games a year, cups, big league matches, european games even concerts that will require ever larger capacity! Seats dont consume energy and you can just make sure the top tier isnt used during an average attendance game to keep the atmosphere compact. Surely?

[Sparks]

Originally Posted by Metrolink

Ah, remember Chelsea's crowds (and Newcaslte's for that matter) attendences in the late 80's / early 90's.

Do you remember what our stadium looked like and how much it held?

[Schmeek]

No way potto, I think OC should be avoided at all cost. The aim should be to deliver enough seats to cope fairly comfortably with the bread and butter usage ie the league matches, whilst reserving a few more for the big occasions. There's nothing worse than being in a half empty stadium. The atmosphere is utter sh*te, even if they keep the fans together by closing, say, the upper tier. It's too hard to fill the empty space with noise, and anyway, the upper tier might have the best views.

[leonardhenry]

Originally Posted by Fanatic74

where I could find any picture about the 'old style'(about 1985-1990) Stamford Bridge stadium?Thanks!!

[pompeyfan]

Are Chelsea even able to go through with a move. I remember reading that the name 'Chelsea' and the blue jersey is owned by the people who run Stamford Bridge, meaning that any move away from SB means Abramovich is looking for a new club name and jersey?

[GreenwichSE10]

Eh?

[IHaveNoLegs]

if chelsea leaves stamford bridge they can't be called chelsea

The Stamford Bridge pitch, the freehold, the turnstiles and Chelsea's naming rights are now owned by Chelsea Pitch Owners, a non-profit organisation in which fans are the shareholders. The CPO was created to ensure the stadium could never again be sold to developers. It also means that if someone tries to move the football club to a new stadium they could not use the Chelsea FC name.

[jakkk]

intreeging, i would have thought that the fan shareholders could just vote in favour of a move, i mean what would be the point in diggin their heels in just to be left with a name of a team without any players and an empty ground.

[Republica]

Originally Posted by Schmeek

No way potto, I think OC should be avoided at all cost.

From the point of view of money, I'm pretty sure that if a stadium sells out to a certain point then overcapacity means that extra seats pay for themselves if used only 7-8 times. Therefore it makes economic sense to have a stadium with more seats than are generally needed, if they can fill it only every year or so then its a big cash flow boost in comparison with the extra money for the seat being built.

From a fans point of view i dont think atmosphereis about how full a stadium is, its about not being allowed to stand, no alcohol sales (pissed people sing more) and over zealous stewarding.

On the Chelsea subject i dont think the FA would allow another team to 'do a wimbledon'.