cujo101 75 Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Bad News...http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/jun/07/battersea-power-station-chelsea-malaysia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spike 12,049 Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Typical. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slam Dunk 1,442 Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 http://forum.talkchelsea.net/topic/9808-the-stamford-bridge-thread/page__st__1062 ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KonohasOrangeFlash 2,607 Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Why the fuck couldn't we just outbid them... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tricky 301 Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 FFS now what? That represented a genuine opportunity to remain in West London. I can't think of many viable sites within a couple of miles of the Bridge.Was really hoping we would get the site. We desperately need to move in order to increase revenues. Bigger ground could easily make us an extra £25 million a year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fulham Broadway 17,363 Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Not too upset about that.Malaysian owners will probably now paint it red Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tricky 301 Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Not too upset about that.Malaysian owners will probably now paint it redOr go bankrupt trying to develop the site.Can you think of a viable alternative? I love the Bridge as much as the next man but a 60k stadium on the banks of the Thames with a 15k single tier would have been amazing. Imagine the noise which could have been generated. Guess there is always Olympia / EarlsCourt. But I think those are pretty much done deals with other property developers.Which means we are stuck in a small, outdatedground with little chance if moving in the foreseeable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushman 2,043 Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Malaysian power station, what for ?Perhaps, to bring more pollution to the site ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fulham Broadway 17,363 Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Or go bankrupt trying to develop the site.Can you think of a viable alternative? I love the Bridge as much as the next man but a 60k stadium on the banks of the Thames with a 15k single tier would have been amazing. Imagine the noise which could have been generated.Guess there is always Olympia / EarlsCourt. But I think those are pretty much done deals with other property developers.Which means we are stuck in a small, outdatedground with little chance if moving in the foreseeable. ��Earls Court probably favourite now...or they can put more effort into the Bridge now and finding a way to add 10,000 seats. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrismada9 1,948 Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Arsenal never had these problems when they were given rights to build the Emirates stadium... :/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
francozola 2,040 Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Not surprised with this. It was a little ridiculous how a lot of people just took it as a given that we were going to move there. There were so many stages to the whole process and plenty of opposition too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spike 12,049 Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 It's not over yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave30 728 Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 That was the only site i would have been happy with. Stamford Bridge Forever now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue-in-me-Veins 4,067 Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Earls Court probably favourite now...or they can put more effort into the Bridge now and finding a way to add 10,000 seats.they cant. and also fuuuuuuukkkkkkkkkkk!!!!!!!!!the russian out fukin bid!?!?!?!? wow, soo much for being able to sustain themselves and not bank on roman. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrismada9 1,948 Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 You have to say, this is typical from our perspective!1) we half-hartedly bid for something with a substantial yet low amount of money..2) Someone else pitches in with a far superior bid, we don't counter bid, they get what they want..3) .. we don't comment! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kezza 1,965 Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 http://www.chelseafc.com/page/LatestNews/0,,10268~2804528,00.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liquidator 5,176 Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 We should go all out for Earls Court now. According to myearlscourt.com full planning permission has not yet been granted. The total area in question is the size of 120 football pitches apparently so if we could bribe the council by chucking in some luxury flats into an application we could stand a chance. Obviously there are good transport links there, with links to 2 District line branches easily walkable from the centre of the site. Also, part of the land belongs to Hammersmith and Fulham council who will want to keep us in the borough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nullabletype 987 Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 You have to say, this is typical from our perspective!1) we half-hartedly bid for something with a substantial yet low amount of money..2) Someone else pitches in with a far superior bid, we don't counter bid, they get what they want..3) .. we don't comment!Perhaps the club just didn't see the value in the site. Every party placing a bid is going to have an upper limit to what they think the site is worth. Maybe this other company made their bid and Roman didn't think it was worth pumping more money in to. I'm assuming the clubs train of thought was that their bid would be accepted based on their proposed plans for the site rather than the sum of money offered.http://www.chelseafc...2804528,00.htmlGreat avatar. Cool cool cool. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kezza 1,965 Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Great avatar. Cool cool cool.Haha, thanks. Cant get enough of good old community.Was in Belfast last november btw, won a trip to the EMAs. Loved the city! (EMAs, not so much)They'll have some sort of financial plan that says something like, alright we're are gonna pump x amount of money into developing the ground, and we won't our money back within x amount of years. Battersea probably just didn't fit within their business strategy.Also the owners and community around the site would of had some sort of say of who they wanted to take over the sight. It was either a pretty mall or someshit or a football stadium. I think the (non footballing) community around the site would rather have a mall than a stadium. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nullabletype 987 Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Haha, thanks. Cant get enough of good old community.Was in Belfast last november btw, won a trip to the EMAs. Loved the city! (EMAs, not so much)They'll have some sort of financial plan that says something like, alright we're are gonna pump x amount of money into developing the ground, and we won't our money back within x amount of years. Battersea probably just didn't fit within their business strategy.Also the owners and community around the site would of had some sort of say of who they wanted to take over the sight. It was either a pretty mall or someshit or a football stadium. I think the (non footballing) community around the site would rather have a mall than a stadium.Somebody has to! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.