Redevelopment?

[spuz 143]

Does having a new stadium with a new name matter,because they're looking at renaming the bridge anyway. Plus,everyone complains that the bridge is like a morgue most times so a move to bring in more fans might actually give us home games with an atmosphere again.

We do sell out all games,even mickey mouse cup games. The Copenhagen game didn't sell because of prices.

If we get the chance,especially whilst roman is around to fund it,I think we should.

[Cloudy 6]

SB can't be extended because the laws don't allow it. Because of these laws, we've actually had to reduce capacity and knocking down the hotel won't get around these laws. Earls Court would have been ideal and Nine Elms ok too (which is the land east of Battersea power station that is full of warehouses). White City is a bit too far north but close enough and Oak Common is definitely too far.

[5354 204]

 I think all of us are missing the economic side of the club.

Currently we are not filling the stadiums because of the quite-expensive ticket prices, but with a bigger stadium, trust me - the ticket prices will fall. (Its normal economics supply + demand.)

True that currently we do not need a stadium, but do you guys know that the costs of building the stadium will probably sky rocket high in the future? Especially when property prices increases furthermore.

And lastly, relying on pitch performance for revenue is short-term in my opinion. Securing a larger fans base is important as it generates more revenue through merchandise. 

[GodZola 630]

With the new financial regulations being introduced in a few years time we will have to improve our marketing tenfold if we remain at the Bridge, the capacity restricts our match day revenue & unfortunately even the the likes of West Ham will be leaving us behind & that's not too mention our current rivals who.have far bigger stadiums which generate massive income for them.

If these rules are not challenged & there are no significant loopholes to exploit them, we will no longer be able to rely on Roman signing the likes of a Torres or a Luiz every season as we simple will not have the revenue streams to ensure this could happen.

The hierarchy are aware of this & are probably putting things in place now. Unfortunately I cannot see us staying at the Bridge, I can see us moving to Earls court with something like a 60,000 all seated new stadium that will probably have property developed around it that will help fund it, I don't know the politics surrounding selling the Bridge but being that It's situated in the most expensive place in England to buy a house my guesses is that the sell will provide a huge chunk for the new development.

The recent European game v Copenhagen didn't sell out due many season ticket holders refusing to pay 75 pound or just under to watch basically a category 'B' game. Our league games sell out very quickly & I don't know about you guys but try getting a ticket for Arsenal, Utd, Liverpool, Spurs etc!

My heart wants to stay at the Bridge, but my head says we will move for financial reasons & hopefully we all may benefit from that with sensible ticket prices for all.

[Madmax 9,219]

We'll generate hundreds of millions from the sale of the Bridge, considering the realty rates there. This will go a long way in developing the new stadium. And bear in mind, Financial Fair Play rules place no restrictions on stadium building/redevelopment expenses. That's a massive advantage.

[GodZola 630]

We'll generate hundreds of millions from the sale of the Bridge, considering the realty rates there. This will go a long way in developing the new stadium. And bear in mind, Financial Fair Play rules place no restrictions on stadium building/redevelopment expenses. That's a massive advantage.

j

Yes Max, there are no restrictions on redevelopment & maybe a big factor in the hierarchys decision to move, there also no restrictions on youth development. As I said I think it is logical financially & the move will give us an edge on our rivals by exploiting these rules with the redevelopment, its just a wrench to leave the Bridge.

[Laylabelle 9,359]

Hard really,if we could expand make life a lot easier but sadly not the case

As for ticket prices,in the ideal world if we got a bigger staduim the prices would go back down.But look at the Emrites some of their tickets are stupidly over priced and if we still have what his name in charge be a case of more money! Mean for most the games this season they have been sold out really.

[NattyBlue 44]

I know Arsenal fans that are what, just below the ST prices o.w paying £75 for the Chelsea game. MU even charged £50 for our game in the CL. atm I'm very happy with our "balanced" ticketing system and loyalty points system. It may not be perfect but it makes more sense then other schemes out there to me.

Only option for me is for us to buy the council out and make SB bigger

[steve5221 91]

I know Arsenal fans that are what, just below the ST prices o.w paying £75 for the Chelsea game. MU even charged £50 for our game in the CL. atm I'm very happy with our "balanced" ticketing system and loyalty points system. It may not be perfect but it makes more sense then other schemes out there to me.

Only option for me is for us to buy the council out and make SB bigger

We will never be able to compete with the revenues of Arsenal, Man Utd and Liverpool(when they get back in the champs league) unless we either move to a new stadium or offer naming rights....

I worry if we move to a 60,000 seater stadium we will not sell it out unless we are competing for the league and CL (Blackburn game), plus the expense of a new stadium around the Chelsea area would be huge.....naming rights is the way forward....

[5354 204]

Guys the expense of the stadium will probably be footed by Roman. (Hopefully and not a bank loan)

[Styles 9,790]

Stamford Bridge is usually sold out. Using the Copenhagen game as an example of poor attendance is silly. Who wants to pay £57 to watch a dead rubber against a bunch of journey men? No thanks.

[eldo 868]

Stamford Bridge is usually sold out. Using the Copenhagen game as an example of poor attendance is silly. Who wants to pay £57 to watch a dead rubber against a bunch of journey men? No thanks.

Think about that more..

[spuz 143]

We will never be able to compete with the revenues of Arsenal, Man Utd and Liverpool(when they get back in the champs league) unless we either move to a new stadium or offer naming rights....

I worry if we move to a 60,000 seater stadium we will not sell it out unless we are competing for the league and CL (Blackburn game), plus the expense of a new stadium around the Chelsea area would be huge.....naming rights is the way forward....

Our revenue is better than Liverpools even when they are in the Champions league.

It's only Real madrid,Barca,Man u,Bayern & Arse we need to try and catch up on.

The trouble with naming rights is I don't think UEFA consider that as financial fair play.

[steve5221 91]

Our revenue is better than Liverpools even when they are in the Champions league.

It's only Real madrid,Barca,Man u,Bayern & Arse we need to try and catch up on.

The trouble with naming rights is I don't think UEFA consider that as financial fair play.

If thats the case then we are gonna struggle as we need to get to a stage where we do'nt have to rely on Roman to be a huge club and I doubt if we can achieve that in the current stadium....

[spuz 143]

If thats the case then we are gonna struggle as we need to get to a stage where we do'nt have to rely on Roman to be a huge club and I doubt if we can achieve that in the current stadium....

I don't think we can either. Although our revenue is very good for a 42k stadium.

Ultimately the one thing that would be good and solve alot of problems but will never happen is players having a wage cap.That's the thing that's really killing the game.

[Laylabelle 9,359]

I think as well for the Coppenhagan game that we were pretty much through unless we had mental moments and it was on the telly,so more reason to save dosh and watch at home..Had the result been different 1-0 etc more probably would've gone as less set in stone

[Styles 9,790]

Think about that more..

Oh so because we don't sell out even the dead rubbers we can never have a bigger stadium?

We could easily fill a 55,000 capacity 95% of the time imo.

[eldo 868]

Oh so because we don't sell out even the dead rubbers we can never have a bigger stadium?

We could easily fill a 55,000 capacity 95% of the time imo.

Who wants to pay £57 to watch a dead rubber against a bunch of journey men? No thanks.

I was referring to this.

We have 1500 less seats in CL.

Inter Milan 38,107

FC Copenhagen 36,454