strong centreback 157 Posted May 6, 2012 Share Posted May 6, 2012 That pic looks good but id have said that the power station shell would have been either the north or south stand to any new ground, quite possibly the south end that the club want to make upto 15000, that would be a sight to behold 15000 chels in a quite unique and imposing stand screaming at the top of their lungs, the acoustics are something the club need to make sure are right in any new build, but I suppose that it shouldn't be a problem in a purpose built ground, unlike at the bridge currently due to the four separate stands all built separately and with different designs and bodge job corner infills. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ulsterchelsea 3,221 Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 It's blatantly obvious that no one really wants to leave the bridge and when it happens it will be a sad day but it is only a matter of time in truth. Think the club proved that the issues and costs surrounding the extension of the bridge were too much, not really sure what f&h are doing saying they think we can still do it. Battersea looks a super prospect and would give us the stadium needed to compete with the best in Europe. Will be following with great interest. Should say tho that twat Boris Johnson could Fuck this up big time Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capriccioso 2,545 Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 There are a couple of problems I see in bidding so early:1. CPO will need some time to get convinced.2. The city may not let us build a stadium there.We need to sort both out or we'll end up either as Battersea F.C. or a club that owns a power station. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strong centreback 157 Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 It's blatantly obvious that no one really wants to leave the bridge and when it happens it will be a sad day but it is only a matter of time in truth. Think the club proved that the issues and costs surrounding the extension of the bridge were too much, not really sure what f&h are doing saying they think we can still do it. Battersea looks a super prospect and would give us the stadium needed to compete with the best in Europe. Will be following with great interestFulham and hammersmith don't want to lose our business rates, that is all they care about, end of the day they are only make the noises that there is a way to expand to slow down any move by throwing doubt into the uneducated minds (by that I mean people who haven't researched the problems with potential expansion), they know as well as the club knows that the bridge can't be expanded but at the end of the day they are set to lose out if we move so will put up a fight if only to draw the process out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ulsterchelsea 3,221 Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 http://www.chelseafc.com/page/ChelseaPitchOwnersNews/0,,10268~2763017,00.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capriccioso 2,545 Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 Well then, that's all done.Battersea it is. Sigh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDN Blue 7,903 Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 FFS, LBHF are toying with the CPO now. They're trying to purposely enrage and delay this process, trying to hold the club (indirectly) to ransom.LBHF urged CPO to challenge CFC's findings by engaging experts in the fields of planning, transport, health and safety. ulsterchelsea and strong centreback 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strong centreback 157 Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 FFS, LBHF are toying with the CPO now. They're trying to purposely enrage and delay this process, trying to hold the club (indirectly) to ransom.Muggy cunts surely if LBHF want us to stay so badly then they could provide the cpo with the information on safe egress in case of fires which I believe is one of the main obstacles, there are 45m reasons why they want us to stay and not one of them is because its in the fans/future fans best interests, hence the insinuation the club should be charging more per ticket. ulsterchelsea 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kostas 1,468 Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 Well then, that's all done.Battersea it is. Sigh.Succeeding in the bid and securing the plans for the underground extension was always going to be a bigger ask than the CPO. I'm afraid misinformation (darned wikipedia articles) made the issue bigger than it ever was. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ulsterchelsea 3,221 Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 Muggy cunts surely if LBHF want us to stay so badly then they could provide the cpo with the information on safe egress in case of fires which I believe is one of the main obstacles, there are 45m reasons why they want us to stay and not one of them is because its in the fans/future fans best interests, hence the insinuation the club should be charging more per ticket. asking for the club to consider charging fans more per ticket had me enraged. Shows how typically the sort of people who run council's are deeply out of touch with normal people. In fairness tho I'm not sure how seriously the cpo are taking this. CFC'S recent dossier was pretty detailed and seemed ,to the layman such as myself at least, to be very transparent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manpe 10,861 Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 So we won the bid for battersea? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
francozola 2,040 Posted May 8, 2012 Share Posted May 8, 2012 Why are the LBHF so opposed to the club's proposal of moving elsewhere? Is it simply because of the $ they'll lose?How much power do they have? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
We Hate Scouse 10,327 Posted May 8, 2012 Share Posted May 8, 2012 Why are the LBHF so opposed to the club's proposal of moving elsewhere? Is it simply because of the $ they'll lose?How much power do they have?Yeah they'll lose hundreds of thousands of pounds.As far as I'm aware they have absolutely no say what so ever and there only way of keeping us there is to prove to the CPO that we can build a stadium or expand on site whilst not having silly financial implications. francozola 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDN Blue 7,903 Posted May 8, 2012 Share Posted May 8, 2012 Why are the LBHF so opposed to the club's proposal of moving elsewhere? Is it simply because of the $ they'll lose?How much power do they have?No power.Well, the "power" they do have is toying with the CPO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capriccioso 2,545 Posted May 8, 2012 Share Posted May 8, 2012 What's up with the council? If they insist there's a way to expand Stamford Bridge, why can't they make the details public?I think they're on the wind up, trying to keep us in their jurisdiction to earn some cash. But that gives the club a position of power, we can threaten to pull out if they don't lay down and accept what we want in terms of rebuilding/expanding Stamford Vridge. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strong centreback 157 Posted May 8, 2012 Share Posted May 8, 2012 Yeah they'll lose hundreds of thousands of pounds.As far as I'm aware they have absolutely no say what so ever and there only way of keeping us there is to prove to the CPO that we can build a stadium or expand on site whilst not having silly financial implications.In the cpo statement it says its actually some 15 million that the council them selves make out of the club whilst the businesses in the local area (there constituents) make approx 30m in revenue off the back of the club, those are the only two reasons why they care about us moving, notice how they only cheep up when the club started the wheels moving on a potential move, nowt out of them for years before the egm last year. ulsterchelsea 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liquidator 5,176 Posted May 8, 2012 Share Posted May 8, 2012 CPO need to be tough with them and set deadlines for LBHF to provide proof about viable expansion Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kojo 4,676 Posted May 8, 2012 Share Posted May 8, 2012 The real CFC died the day he bought us. But your right its sad to think of CFC leaving the brigde, but has to be if we want top players,and be ready to compete with top clubs in the future.HENRI I'VE BEEN CALLING YOU ALL DAY, WHY DO YOU NOT PICK UP!? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capriccioso 2,545 Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 I'll take back my initial disgust at the relocation. I'm still against it as a matter of principle, but the artists impressions of the stadium look absolutely brilliant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KonohasOrangeFlash 2,607 Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 I still think it would be better if they built it inside the power plant itself rather than adjacent to it.This Looks alot better, more intimidating and beautiful than thisThe proposal is for the stadium to be built within the power station..http://www.guardian....m?newsfeed=trueHopefully this is true, although the article mentions 'incorporating' the power plant in the stadium...that doesn't sound good capriccioso and Bosnian Blue 2 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.