Expand the stadium? The poll

[ROB-THE-BLUE]

3 minutes ago, promised land said:

No they don't relay the pitch now, since that desso stuff was sewn into the pitch what they do now is kill it off at the end of the season, replant it and go again.

 

Its more what's under the pitch than the turf, drainage and the like it would cost a fortune to lower all that a metre or two just to get a few rows in, you could install the rows now as a lot of grounds have seats at turf level.

 

Awful view down there though.

 

Old Trafford, Etihad are two that spring to mind and the etihad installed extra rows the other season at pitch level.

Brings back memories of sitting in the front row of the East Stand at Filbo! I remember being there the day Kalac was paraded at a home game, he walked right in front of me looking up all 6'7 of him from 3ft below ground level

[Quorndon_Fox]

On ‎12‎/‎05‎/‎2017 at 09:23, Sol thewall Bamba said:

We relay the pitch quite often anyway don't we? Digging a down a metre or so wouldn't be that costly surely. Also gives the advantage of getting the fans closer to the pitch all the way round. 

 

It won't happen but it's a cool idea. 

The pitch has 4 inches of soil below the grass and then a full undersoil heating system and sprinkler network, much more work than you could imagine.

[red5]

On 5/12/2017 at 09:23, Sol thewall Bamba said:

We relay the pitch quite often anyway don't we? Digging a down a metre or so wouldn't be that costly surely. Also gives the advantage of getting the fans closer to the pitch all the way round. 

 

It won't happen but it's a cool idea. 

 

7 minutes ago, Quorndon_Fox said:

The pitch has 4 inches of soil below the grass and then a full undersoil heating system and sprinkler network, much more work than you could imagine.

But it's only a bit of grass 

[yorkie1999]

36 minutes ago, Quorndon_Fox said:

The pitch has 4 inches of soil below the grass and then a full undersoil heating system and sprinkler network, much more work than you could imagine.

Which would cost approx 1/2 - 1 million quid. which pays for itself in the first year at 400 quid a ticket for 2500 seats

[CockneyFox]

Would be cool to insert some extra rows at the front but financially any expansion ought to include an increased corporate offering to make it really viable.

 

If there's strong demand for corporate hospitality alongside matchday tickets then it's a no-brainer

[Ted Maul]

I have wondered myself whether we could lower the pitch and put some more seats in below ground level. I can't work out whether excavating and relaying the pitch/undersoil heating would be cheaper than knocking up a completely new stand. I suppose there would be the full bottom tier to build as well, if we did it that way.

 

It would be great to get the crowd nearer the pitch though, we could make a really partisan atmosphere, and we would still have the option for outward expansion if required further down the line.

[josh_baskin]

On 12/05/2017 at 09:23, Sol thewall Bamba said:

We relay the pitch quite often anyway don't we? Digging a down a metre or so wouldn't be that costly surely. Also gives the advantage of getting the fans closer to the pitch all the way round. 

 

It won't happen but it's a cool idea. 

And the cost of a new bigger roof to add to that

[davieG]

Looks like a no then as he seems to be suggesting that a bigger stadium might dilute the atmosphere although i'd argue what's happening on the pitch good or bad = stadium atmosphere good or bad.

[red5]

Sounds like a no to me.

[dayday]

So how would they know unless it's done?

 

I think they should just get on with it, never been a better opportunity.

[yorkie1999]

On 21/05/2017 at 19:34, davieG said:

Looks like a no then as he seems to be suggesting that a bigger stadium might dilute the atmosphere although i'd argue what's happening on the pitch good or bad = stadium atmosphere good or bad.

Sounds to me that he's suggesting the time to build something would impact the capacity  and reduce the amount of support.

[Long Eaton Fox]

Let's say that we could increase the capacity to 40,000. That would generate around 7m extra per season. Do we have the fan base to fill it especially if we were lower prem. 7m is nothing compared to all of the sponsorship. I would say no at the moment. Turbulent times.

[Webbo]

2 minutes ago, Long Eaton Fox said:

Let's say that we could increase the capacity to 40,000. That would generate around 7m extra per season. Do we have the fan base to fill it especially if we were lower prem. 7m is nothing compared to all of the sponsorship. I would say no at the moment. Turbulent times.

When the accounts were released a couple of years ago we earned £10.5 million from ticket sales. An extra 8000 seats would be an increase of 25%, somewhere between £2.5 to 3 million a year and that's assuming we sold out every week.

[Wymsey]

If it's given the go-ahead, the club/council must put in place, somehow, a better traffic management proposal in place.

The current one, on normal match days, doesn't really help at all in terms of traffic congestion around the area and going out of most areas of the city.

Can be a nightmare after a game.

[Guest CityFan 06]

2 minutes ago, Wymeswold fox said:

If it's given the go-ahead, the club/council must put in place, somehow, a better traffic management proposal in place.

The current one, on normal match days, doesn't really help at all in terms of traffic congestion around the area and going out of most areas of the city.

Can be a nightmare after a game.

This. I'm not sure how they would do it but extra traffic will be even worse. 

[Long Eaton Fox]

I based my rough estimate on match day tickets of £45. Cost of ground expansion is 10/20/30 million? Don't think it is worth it. Chelsea came 1st with a 40k capacity stadium and spurs 2nd with 38k.

[AmarteyAndChill]

Just now, Long Eaton Fox said:

I based my rough estimate on match day tickets of £45. Cost of ground expansion is 10/20/30 million? Don't think it is worth it. Chelsea came 1st with a 40k capacity stadium and spurs 2nd with 38k.

Long term success for a club our size may depend on the size of our stadium. Also, it seperates us from clubs such as west Brom, Stoke etc. 

[st albans fox]

4 minutes ago, Long Eaton Fox said:

I based my rough estimate on match day tickets of £45. Cost of ground expansion is 10/20/30 million? Don't think it is worth it. Chelsea came 1st with a 40k capacity stadium and spurs 2nd with 38k.

Both will have 60k stadiums within five years.

 

standing still isn't really an option for an ambitious club

[Long Eaton Fox]

1 minute ago, AmarteyAndChill said:

Long term success for a club our size may depend on the size of our stadium. Also, it seperates us from clubs such as west Brom, Stoke etc. 

Yes maybe. Need someone to do the maths. Hope the club have someone in place.

[dayday]

3 minutes ago, Wymeswold fox said:

If it's given the go-ahead, the club/council must put in place, somehow, a better traffic management proposal in place.

The current one, on normal match days, doesn't really help at all in terms of traffic congestion around the area and going out of most areas of the city.

Can be a nightmare after a game.

 

A lot of grounds I've been are just as bad as Leicester for traffic congestion after a match.

 

 

[davieG]

The financial gain maybe insignificant but if they really have the club,  the city/county and fans at heart then they should be catering for all those fans that can't get to see games in the short term. In the longer term they are missing out on the opportunity to grab the hearts of the children of today to make them long term loyal LCFC fans. It's not as if they can't afford it and I doubt any business expects to recoup capitical costs in the first few years.

[Webbo]

The thing is, with the 20 is plenty campaign and such the pressure on ticket prices is downward. People are talking about being able to pay to watch the match at home on the telly which will affect the gate. I'm not sure the risk of the extra investment adds up.

[Dr The Singh]

2 minutes ago, Webbo said:

The thing is, with the 20 is plenty campaign and such the pressure on ticket prices is downward. People are talking about being able to pay to watch the match at home on the telly which will affect the gate. I'm not sure the risk of the extra investment adds up.

Mate, I know many like me, desperate for a season ticket, I hope they invest

[Bob Weasel Fox]

38 minutes ago, davieG said:

The financial gain maybe insignificant but if they really have the club,  the city/county and fans at heart then they should be catering for all those fans that can't get to see games in the short term. In the longer term they are missing out on the opportunity to grab the hearts of the children of today to make them long term loyal LCFC fans. It's not as if they can't afford it and I doubt any business expects to recoup capitical costs in the first few years.

Indeed

 

come on City please expand the stadium 

[Gerard]

13 hours ago, AmarteyAndChill said:

Long term success for a club our size may depend on the size of our stadium. Also, it seperates us from clubs such as west Brom, Stoke etc. 

 

40,000 could easily be filled IMO.

 

If the club ambitions stretch further than just being happy to be in the Premier League then we need a bigger ground and attendances for status as much as anything else.

 

The big six all have or will soon have 55,000+ stadiums. Then there are clubs like West Ham, Everton and Newcastle who all have or will soon have 50,000+ stadiums. Even in the Championship Sunderland, Villa, Wednesday and Leeds have 40,000+ stadiums.

 

I could understand it if we weren't selling out but we've virtually sold out every league game for the last three seasons. Considering the price is relatively small to build when you consider it will last a lifetime and all for the cost of a Slimani or a Musa/Mendy. We're marketing ourselves as a small club punching above it's weight when 13 other clubs have 40,000+ stadiums. We're making a statement that our true level is that of a Stoke, West Brom, Derby, Forest, Sheff United, etc.