test

Welcome to Talk Chelsea

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

Steve

Stamford Bridge thread

Started by Steve,

2,647 posts in this topic

If they boycott the club by refusing to go to the new stadium, they're not die-hard fans. IMO.

Or old fashioned however you look at it. My point is a new stadium won't help the dying atmosphere at home games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My point is a new stadium won't help the dying atmosphere at home games.

On the contrary, it might do just that.

Simple economics dictate that more the people you stuff into the ground, less you need to take from them individually - and still end up making a sizeable improvement on your present earnings considering the increase in numbers on matchday rise by 50% compared to current levels in a 60k stadium. Thus, cheaper tickets bring in more of the local, vocal lot who obviously enhance the atmosphere. This is of course, assuming that we sell out the proposed 60k seats every week.

Also, ticket prices currently wouldn't increase sharply either, I'd imagine, as costs associated with stadium redevelopment are not under the purview of UFFP, calming fears that the proposed move would result in a large hike.

strong centreback likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its not as if ticket prices will be cheaper either, in fact they'd probably go up massively to help pay for the ground :lol: I think I'm becoming more and more against a move, although I do recognise we need to go. I simply want to stay at the Bridge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

all we need to do is introduce safe standing . Cheaper tickets , bigger gates and improved atmosphere . problem solved .

Ideally that would be great. But lets not forget the consensus now, everyone agrees, that football is first and foremost a business, with the actual kicking a ball about bit way down the list.

Therefore we know the corporate money making side of a new stadium will be the priority. Great big corporate boxes, and tax incentives for block corporate bookings, and no tickets wouldnt get cheaper.

It is therefore critical that the Fans Forum are consulted and their wishes acted on, all along the process. For me the selling of CPO shares, giving one man a complete say in what happens to the club I am not happy about

Heres a survey about the move/ CPO sell off to complete if you want....

http://thechels.net/2011/10/the-burning-question-chelsea-the-cpo/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can understand how fans who've been going to bridge for all their life feel about the move and I would want us to stay at the bridge too part selfishly because I have not been able to save up enough for a month long trip yet. But I wouldn't even bother comparing what I feel to people who go there week in week out.

I'm sure many of them share their disgruntledness towards constantly increasing ticket prices, though the new stadium wouldn't guarantee that prices will not increase it will ensure that they won't increase as radically if we were to stay put and compete at the top level and also satisfy the UEFA Financial Fair play.

Put it this way, your family has for all the generations you can remember, through thick and thin, stayed in a house of 3 bedrooms. Quite a palce when it used to be the talk of town 100 years back. Now you have your parents, a brother, both the missus, and 4 kids in 3 bedrooms. You'd ideally want to expand the house and fit everyone in or buy 3 houses to fit everyone. The family is broke and can't afford to expand it. Option is stay where you are how you are or sell it off to buy 3 houses which will fit your needs.

Actually I'm not too convinced by my example but what I mean to say is I trust that all other options have been checked which would have provided for us to stay at the Bridge and only when none of them seemed viable are we going in for the move.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think both sides have to be open minded to eachother on what is the most significant change off the field to our club since Ken Bates fought off the vultures.

It is a difficult one to side with imho, if we stay at the Bridge then we can probably say goodbye to the marquee signings that we have been getting over the past 10 or so years & we will fall further behind the Utd's, Arsenal's of this world not to mention the top European clubs in terms of revenue & therefore attracting the best talent. Moving will also absorb any losses as we can do this by building the new stadium which is permitted in the new financial rules, therefore continuity of buying the best talent is assured. With having a 60k stadium it will keep us in the mix.

Having been a fan for 40 years albeit not seeing to much of the seventies, really getting into the club in the middle eighties as a young teen & can remember getting pissed on by a massive skinhead in the shed end wasn't a great feeling at the time but that was part of the history of the ground with seeing so many great games since, especially having the wonderful pleasure of watching the best player ever in Zola to grace it was a joy to behold - great memories & emotions from a fantastic history of our famous ground.

That said I side on moving but only if the board are open & honest with exhausting all avenues with extending the Bridge because I think plan A for them is to move & plan B is to extend the Bridge - their not going to waste 1mil on drawing up future plans for nothing! I believe the board should agree to a binding agreement with the CPO that fans have a say in some of the fundamental things in moving, for example ticket prices. This season they have got it badly wrong with over charging for European group games when they could of kept prices the same ensuring a sell out, they are getting that revenue back anyway by charging extra on category AA game, the board are just being greedy. For me this is a time for the CPO to strike a blow for the fans to ensure we are not fleeced anymore. I actually see this as a win-win situation for the club & the fans if both parties use their common sense & agree to logical thinking - the Club will move together In the right direction if they can be sensible.

One thing I would like to add is if we do move (I think Earls court is favourite) I hope they build it so we have the option to extend the stadium if needed, we are growing & will continue to grow. One of my local sides Reading have that option & I think that's great business sense & something that we should get in the deeds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The atmosphere will not 100% be shit. Porto, Benfica, Galatasary have moved to new stadiums recently and their atmosphere has not gone. The possibility of cheaper ticket prices might bring back some of the older, louder and more passionate fans at games

Porto, Benfica and Galatasary are terrible examples. They all had top class support before their moves. Whereas our support is shocking already.

No doubt the acoustics at a new stadium would be terrible as well, just like Wembley!

Unfortunately there's absolutely no doubt that this move will eventually happen, although I don't expect the CPO's to give in straight away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Porto, Benfica and Galatasary are terrible examples. They all had top class support before their moves. Whereas our support is shocking already.

No doubt the acoustics at a new stadium would be terrible as well, just like Wembley!

Unfortunately there's absolutely no doubt that this move will eventually happen, although I don't expect the CPO's to give in straight away.

Seem to remember Bates and several players being CPOs. Wise for one.

Wonder if they'll be so quick to relinquish them ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a lot will initially, and I can imagine Wise waiting to see what the fans do.....

It'll be very interesting to say the least. They need a majority 51% for CPO to sell all their shares, or something like that.

It's interesting reading that article, they say they don't mind moving but the CPO gives them additional security.. Which is understandable. However it's even more understandable about Roman not wanting us to be a public company.

After all.. We don't want to look like Manchester United on the Singapore market :whistling:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It'll be very interesting to say the least. They need a majority 51% for CPO to sell all their shares, or something like that.

It's interesting reading that article, they say they don't mind moving but the CPO gives them additional security.. Which is understandable. However it's even more understandable about Roman not wanting us to be a public company.

After all.. We don't want to look like Manchester United on the Singapore market :whistling:

Whooa ! Theres a hell of a difference in the Glazers attempts to pay off their debts with a Singapore flotation, and Chelseas CPO association. The CPO was set up specifically so as not to fall into the situation that had left the club at the mercy of speculators.

Now I am not saying Roman would just flog the whole thing off one day to property speculators, but who knows ? The CPO prevents this scenario.

( One of) the worst thing Bates did was build that wanky hotel and restauarant complex, which in effect prevented expansion to a 55-60kk venue with access from West Brompton and Fulham Broadway.

Mind you If WTC 7 can just 'collapse' ....... :whistling:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whooa ! Theres a hell of a difference in the Glazers attempts to pay off their debts with a Singapore flotation, and Chelseas CPO association. The CPO was set up specifically so as not to fall into the situation that had left the club at the mercy of speculators.

Now I am not saying Roman would just flog the whole thing off one day to property speculators, but who knows ? The CPO prevents this scenario.

( One of) the worst thing Bates did was build that wanky hotel and restauarant complex, which in effect prevented expansion to a 55-60kk venue with access from West Brompton and Fulham Broadway.

Mind you If WTC 7 can just 'collapse' ....... :whistling:

Oh yeah, don't get me wrong. I understand the importance of the CPO as compared to United's policy :lol:

Definitely. A very stupid mistake on his part.. I think there's a slight overreaction on this story though, it's not like Chelsea will make this decision hastily and I'm sure they'll consider the rich history and tradition of Chelsea at Stamford Bridge & if we did move, I'm sure it would be in consultation with CSG.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The CPO need to look at the future of the club. Roman isn't gonna be with us forever. Hr has done alot for the club and is willing to do even more. 20 years on If Roman were to leave we should be in a position to financially sustain ourselves. New stadium means we can generate more revenue and also attract new owners if Roman was to quit. If CPO stays it means the club cannot recoup the money they would use to build the stadium.

This is a new chapter in the club's history and we should all accept it and move on. If we don't we could face sanctions from financial fair play and even worse this could drive out Roman too which could spell a disaster for the club.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

( One of) the worst thing Bates did was build that wanky hotel and restauarant complex, which in effect prevented expansion to a 55-60kk venue with access from West Brompton and Fulham Broadway.

Mind you If WTC 7 can just 'collapse' ....... :whistling:

Is knocking the village down an option? I would gladly see that go if it meant we could expand SB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have known for years that for us to compete in the future, especially with the financial rules in play we were going to need a bigger stadium, with all the big clubs in Europe having far bigger stadiums it has to happen.

It has also been pretty clear that the chance of us expanding the bridge for a number of reasons is slim to none.

Chelsea building a new stadium at a new location has been on the cards for a while now, but with the current announcement it really is hitting home and not suprisingly it has divided opinion. It is a unique situation for us having the CPO shares in place which very much complicates things for Chelsea.

As much it would break my heart for Chelsea to leave Stamford bridge, for progress and for the future i think it is inevitable that we will move to a new loacation.

Chelsea need to be very clever about this, there needs to be serious communication with the club and match going fans with regards to location, design ect.. it will be the right way to do it and the only way to smooth the transition over.

eldo, Madmax and Term-X like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing that can be to our advantage is that the CPO can hold the club to ransom by demanding that the fans opinion should be taken into consideration whether it is the aethrtics and design or even ticketing prices. This can help avoid an Arsenal type disaster.

Te reason ticket prices are higher now is because we have limited seats at The club and we need to increase revenue through the sale of tickets to meet the Financial Fair Play rules.

New stadium with 60000 seats would mean decrease in the ticketing prices.

Example: 42000 for 60$ each = 2.52m

60000 for 45$ each = 2.70m

The revenue increases and the ticket prices go down. Fans are benefitted and the club is benefitted. Everyone goes home happy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The idea of moving is to make more money so why would they reduce prices. What would be the point of making the same amount of by selling 55k seats at a reduced price when they can make the same money selling 44k at the current prices.

it could work -a new stadium with atmosphere -terracing at both ends, cheaper prices, and lets face it the atmosphere at SB is nothing like it used to be -we've just the fantastic history...but more than likely the reality is , this wont be the case

There are millions of people who miss out on actually going, and their only experience of Chelsea FC is through millions of pixels on a TV screen. I think for those people its easy to make judgements.

Whatever happens, it wont be for quite a while yet though...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.