City sizes and support

[ericb]

I'm pretty sure i've met bricks with more charisma than MLG he's like a mix between rainman and statto from that mid 90's tv show but more geeky.

[Matthew Le God]

FFS do you never give up? Ever heard the phrase agree to disagree? Just about every person who has posted on this thread has come down against you. I know you're a fighter, and that's a nice quality, but just throw the towel in and call it a night.

 

I'm pretty sure i've met bricks with more charisma than MLG he's like a mix between rainman and statto from that mid 90's tv show but more geeky.

 

What in that post do you have an issue with then?

 

Just because four or five people have been against me in this thread doesn't mean there aren't other that agree with me, they may just not be as bloody-minded/sad as me in a debate and not want to get involved. However, many of the accusations of the way I am persistent with making points can also be directed at those on the other side of the argument, such as yourselves.

[egg]

I'm pretty sure i've met bricks with more charisma than MLG he's like a mix between rainman and statto from that mid 90's tv show but more geeky.

 

I just put MLG into an online code breaker and it came up with ADHD. Weird.

[Crab Lungs]

Gandhi once said you can still be in a minority of one and still be right.

 

FWIW, we would not fill a 50k stadium in the Premier League unless we had Blackburn-esque prices.

[Elmore]

As a non-partisan reader of this argument, I think MLG is the winner and egg, CB Fry and ericb are the losers. Hope that helps.

[hypochondriac]

Yep, Egg is making himself look foolish by contradicting himself.

 

I was referring to you. I think you have autism TBH.

[egg]

Gandhi once said you can still be in a minority of one and still be right.

 

FWIW, we would not fill a 50k stadium in the Premier League unless we had Blackburn-esque prices.

 

And that's the point.

 

Any increase has to be commercial and factor in basic supply and demand.

 

We could have a demand for 32k tickets and sell them all at a premium, but only be able to sell significantly more at a lesser cost. Who knows.

 

The point is that we need demand for much more than 32k to make any increase viable as the investment would have to wipe its' own face and turn a profit.

 

I would love to see us in massive stadium filled to the rafters, but also want to see us run as a commercially minded business. On the (lack of) evidence available we cannot achieve both.

[Matthew Le God]

I was referring to you.

 

I know you were, I was joking but also trying to make the point that I don't see why you have only apportioned the blame to one side of the argument and not the other.

 

I think you have autism TBH.

 

You make that sound like that is an insult, which is pathetic.

[Tamesaint]

A point which has not been raised so far in this debate is the attitude of the Leibhers to capital investment.

 

It has been remarked before on this board that the Leibhers like to invest in tangible assets rather than in short term assets. I am not an expert in how they built their business but it is pertinent that one of the first decisions that they made at Saints was to invest in better training facilities at Staplewood - despite the Lowe regime having constantly told us how wonderful Staplewood was. Putting the money up for a gradual stadium expabnsion may well tie in with their business ethos.

 

It is Cortese who keeps on mentioning a larger stadium. See his interview in the Sun 10 days ago. I am sure that if a larger ground had been completely ruled out by the Leibhers he would never be raising it.

 

My view, for what it is worth, is that a gradual stadium expansion will start within a season or two of us getting into the Premiership - a bit like Wolves have done (cue abuse about Wolves's relevance to us :-) ). I don't know which stand will be expanded first but I bet that a gradual expansion would see the stadium being filled!!

[hypochondriac]

I know you were, I was joking but also trying to make the point that I don't see why you have only apportioned the blame to one side of the argument and not the other.

 

 

 

You make that sound like that is an insult, which is pathetic.

 

No I didn't. You can read into it what you want but I genuinely think you have some sort of mental disorder, unless you just pretend to be this way on the messageboard to wind people up.

[Matthew Le God]

I genuinely think you have some sort of mental disorder, unless you just pretend to be this way on the messageboard to wind people up.

 

I'm sure a number of people will find that amusing coming from you!

 

Pot, kettle, black... etc

[hypochondriac]

I'm sure a number of people will find that amusing coming from you!

 

Pot, kettle, black... etc

 

Saying that in your opinion the same applies to me does not make it any less true for you.

[Matthew Le God]

I didn't say it did.

 

However all I have done is present my side of a debate with why I think it to be the case and have tried to justify it with what I consider to be relevant evidence. Those on the other side have been just as obsessively posting counter argument and don't have the same petty insults used against them.

[SaintBobby]

Wow...what an eye-scorching thread.

 

Seems to me that 32K might be on the low side if we become a stable or even successful club in the EPL.

 

But it would have to be massively on the low side for an expansion or relocation to be sensible.

 

If SMS was easy to expand to 35K or 36K or even 40K, this might just be worth it in a few years' time.

 

But it isn't.

 

You don't need to even start talking about 50K until we're a Champions League team, which is unlikely ever to happen.

[hypochondriac]

I didn't say it did.

 

However all I have done is present my side of a debate with why I think it to be the case and have tried to justify it with what I consider to be relevant evidence. Those on the other side have been just as obsessively posting counter argument and don't have the same petty insults used against them.

 

I didn't insult you.

[Matthew Le God]

I didn't insult you.

 

hmm...

 

I genuinely think you have some sort of mental disorder.

 

I think most people if told that, would consider it at least a little insulting, wouldn't you?

Edited 5 October, 2011 by Matthew Le God

[hypochondriac]

hmm...

 

 

 

I think most people if told that, would consider it at least a little insulting, wouldn't you?

 

It's not an insult. I genuinely think you do judging you solely on your posts. There certainly seems something like autism in the content.

[SaintBobby]

hmm...

 

Is it possible to say you think someone geneuinely has a mental illness without insulting them?

 

I suspect it is, yes.

[Matthew Le God]

It's not an insult. I genuinely think you do judging you solely on your posts. There certainly seems something like autism in the content.

 

Even if I were, why do you feel the need to constantly tell me? That is odd in itself.

[Matthew Le God]

Is it possible to say you think someone geneuinely has a mental illness without insulting them?

 

I suspect it is, yes.

 

It is when he constantly does it and I doubt he has the background to diagnose the condition being a hypochondriac himself!

[hypochondriac]

Even if I were, why do you feel the need to constantly tell me? That is odd in itself.

 

Where have I constantly said it other than this thread? I think that if that were the case, posters would be less likely to get frustrated by you and realise that you can't help it. I myself would try to be more understanding if I knew you weren't just doing it to wind people up.

[hypochondriac]

It is when he constantly does it and I doubt he has the background to diagnose the condition being a hypochondriac himself!

 

My username is the one I use on every forum I have registered with. It is a word I learnt to spell when I was eight.

[CB Fry]

Newcastle - 44,800 from 43,400 -

A larger club than Saints and so not comparable.

 

 

If Newcastle are a bigger club and not comparable, and they are averaging mid-forties, remind me why we need a 50,000 seater stadium again?

[um pahars]

If Newcastle are a bigger club and not comparable, and they are averaging mid-forties, remind me why we need a 50,000 seater stadium again?

 

For the Cornish Saints I tell thee.

 

Kernow = 100% Saints

[The Kraken]

If Newcastle are a bigger club and not comparable, and they are averaging mid-forties, remind me why we need a 50,000 seater stadium again?

 

Because people would day trip to us from Plymouth; simple.

 

Blimey, this thread has become even more ridiculous than I thought possible.

[Matthew Le God]

If Newcastle are a bigger club and not comparable, and they are averaging mid-forties, remind me why we need a 50,000 seater stadium again?

 

Between 2001 and 2008 Newcastle averaged circa 51k in a 52k stadium every year, selling out most games and were looking to extend it up to 60k. Give it time and they will return to maxing out their stadium.

Edited 5 October, 2011 by Matthew Le God

[The Kraken]

Between 2001 and 2008 Newcastle averaged circa 51k in a 52k stadium every year, selling out most games and were looking to extend it up to 60k. Give it time and they will return to maxing out their stadium.

 

MLG, you're pretty good with stats, apparently?

 

Can you provide a percentage of how many games Saints sold out the home allocation when in the Premier League? You mention Newcastle selling out with 51K of 52K, we often had 30.5K out of 32.5K, so an extra 1K seems like a hell of a lot to put down to segregation.

 

Without stats this whole thread is massively based on assumptions, and therefore a bit pointless.

[mikee]

personally I can see the demand in the Premiership for 40K if we had the capacity, probably only for the big teams and definately if we allocated 5K to away fans. I doubt our gates would drop below 30K for league games. That much I can see just based on our recent Premiership experience.

 

Any more than that would require a major shift in the clubs success and would only happen over a long term period - that's not to say it can't happen if Cortese is to be believed but there is no current evidence to support it.

 

As I say 40K expansion would be very low risk but very costly per seat bugt I would expect this to happen sometime in the next 5 years.

[CB Fry]

You like a bit of pendantry, so lets remind ourselves of what you said in this very thread, and you were very specific about the term "comparable clubs"

 

 

Newcastle - 44,800 from 43,400 - A larger club than Saints and so not comparable.

 

......

 

Anyone that thinks that is a list of "comparable clubs" to Saints is insane! Egg you have already made it clear that you do.

 

 

The comparable club line you wrote there is a reference to the 44,800 quoted in the text from the previous poster. Not any other number.

 

So we now have our ceiling - 44,800 is not comparable, so Saints new super-duper "they said they couldn't climb Everest" aspiration from you is 44,799 or lower. Still effing bonkers, but at least we've brought you down a bit.

 

 

Between 2001 and 2008 Newcastle averaged circa 51k in a 52k stadium every year, selling out most games and were looking to extend it up to 60k. Give it time and they will return to maxing out their stadium.

 

So what? They're not comparable.

Edited 5 October, 2011 by CB Fry

[The Kraken]

Mikee, I don't personally see the point of a bigger stadium if we have to rely upon away fans bringing 5,000 fans each time to get close to filling it. That's 2,000 more tickets than most other Prem sides allocate (and that we would have to make available).

 

Also, I don't share your dropping below 30K, as it happened a few times before in the Prem. You just need to look at our League cup gates to ascertain how ambivalent fans can become to lesser ranked games.

 

Also, I'm not sure how you say adding 8,000 seats would be low risk; it would cost in the order of £32M. That's what St. Mary's originally cost us. just assuming that the Liebherr estate are going to fund it from their pocket out of the goodness of their hearts is a bit short-sighted IMO; any ground improvement would IMO have to prove to be capable of back-paying the costs within a relatively short time-frame (I'm thinking 5 to 10 years).

[sfc4prem]

My username is the one I use on every forum I have registered with. It is a word I learnt to spell when I was eight.

 

:laugh:

 

You're such a c*ck :laugh:

[hypochondriac]

:laugh:

 

You're such a c*ck :laugh:

 

Maybe. But I don't see why that makes me one.

[B Rabbit]

F*ck me are you still banging on about this? You are the most boring c*nt on the planet......give it a rest you tool!

 

I can quite imagine that you just need a quick back hand round the chops and you'll run away squealing....probably squealing '50,000 no less!' though.

[PokingFun]

You've lost me as to how those teams are comparable or the stats are relevant.

 

Most are smaller clubs and have seen huge rises, those that haven't seen large rises are restricted by stadium capacity.

 

I wonder what evidence Wolves based their decision to increase capacity to 36k, and have future plans for 38k and then 50k....

 

 

They were going ahead with this regardless of relegation last season.

 

My use of the words "comparable clubs" aside then .... these numbers clearly show that an uplift to > 40,000 if we are in the premier league will be very difficult to achieve based upon the average uplift seen by those clubs that went up in previous seasons other than the small clubs where the novelty factor of being in the premier league clearly had a massive impact. Teams that have been in the premier league in their recent history are clearly struggling to achieve a greater uplift than around 10%. Birmingham achieved 35% and maybe that's what we might expect at a push.

 

I already said that QPR and Norwich have capacity restrictions. I am fairly sure that West Brom (26k), Brum (29k), Newcastle (52k) do not have such restrictions yet they have still struggled to achieve their current capacity. Only Wolves are doing that out of those clubs and I would suggest they are a better benchmark for us than smaller clubs.

 

To achieve 40,000 if we had the capacity would mean an increase of 50-60% dependent upon our final average attendance for this season and that is a huge ask if the likes of Birmingham cannot fill 29,000 regularly. We might well fill St Marys in the Premier League but do not under estimate the recession on people not coming to football. BBC News said petrol sales were down 15% based on litres sold yesterday for the 1st half of 2011 and if essentials like that are down significantly then you can bet families will be thinking twice about extravagant purchases like premier league football tickets at in excess of £30-35 a pop.

 

My view is 40,000 is ok as an ambition, 50k is simply cloud cuckoo unless we spend like Man City etc. If you think otherwise then you're entitled to that opinion but personally I would reckon time will tell youre very much wrong!

[PokingFun]

You make this too easy!

 

The capacity of Molineux during early stage of construction of the Stan Cullis Stand was circa 24k as they had to knock it down. Poking Fun's post was ill-informed (as are you) and it certainly isn't talking "overwhelming sense" as you describe.

 

Poking Fun even describes Wolves as comparable to Saints. So why don't you want to compare them if you think he speaks with such "overwhelming sense"?

 

My post was no more ill-informed than you're constant speculation about what might happen in the future based on our record in the past. You have simplified things by taking a stance that just because Wolves are increasing their capacity that they must be able to fill it. Quite frankly that argument is bull**** unless you have seen said evidence that Jed Moxey has. I even said in my post that some had capacity ceilings, some had novelty value but the ones that didnt did not see an uplift in the region of 60% needed even to get to 40k let alone 50k.

 

You have an over riding inability to ever accept anyone's argument even though they have based it on some sound factual evidence plus some reasonable assumptions which is what I have done as far as I am concerned. I am actually so confident that my numbers would not be far away that I am prepared to have a wager with you for charity that says if Saints increase capacity to 40,000 then they will still not average better than 35,000. Are you prepared to take that on Mr Pedantic?!

[Joensuu]

We might well fill St Marys in the Premier League but do not under estimate the recession on people not coming to football. BBC News said petrol sales were down 15% based on litres sold yesterday for the 1st half of 2011 and if essentials like that are down significantly then you can bet families will be thinking twice about extravagant purchases like premier league football tickets at in excess of £30-35 a pop.

 

Think you've stumbled on the answer. Attendences are down right across the country, because people are feeling the pinch. However, I think this point backs up MLG's thinking... when the recession ends attendences should rise again... causing Brum's current 84% attendences, and West Brom's current 91% attendences to surge towards capacity.

 

8 years ago we were in an economic boom, and in the top flight and we were pretty much always at capacity (even while serving up often awful football).

 

In 3-4 years time, if we are out of recession, and if we are in the top flight, we could easily find 32k far, far too small for our requirements. If Cortese is aiming to be where he says he is, it would only be logical to be planning a future increase in capacity (either expansion or new build) sooner rather than later.

 

I'm not sure why some of you seem to think a 40-45k stadium is unrealistic.

[The Kraken]

I am actually so confident that my numbers would not be far away that I am prepared to have a wager with you for charity that says if Saints increase capacity to 40,000 then they will still not average better than 35,000. Are you prepared to take that on Mr Pedantic?!

 

Why bother? In Cortese's words himself, any expansion of the stadium is a long, long way down the road. Unlike MLG, Cortese will base his decision on seeing evidence for himself that extra capacity is required, rather than cobbling together irrelevant information from other places ina desperate attempt to provide a contrary stance.

 

Any bet you have will likely take quite a few years yet to cash in, and if we don't expand, ever at all.

[Sour Mash]

F*ck me are you still banging on about this? You are the most boring c*nt on the planet......give it a rest you tool!

 

I can quite imagine that you just need a quick back hand round the chops and you'll run away squealing....probably squealing '50,000 no less!' though.

While I probably don't agree with MLG on this and I can see why he gets on other posters nerves at times, at least he make the effort to support his opinion with some reasoned argument and statistical evidence and doesn't drop to the level of others by sticking in pointless, unnecessary personal abuse. Fair play for him for arguing his corner. I think expansion to 50k isn't particularly realistic, but I wouldn't be surprised if Cortese is looking at employing a QS or firm of building consultants to do a bit of analysis on costs of expansion/costs per seat/potential returns etc, would make fascinating reading I reckon.

[The Kraken]

In 3-4 years time, if we are out of recession, and if we are in the top flight, we could easily find 32k far, far too small for our requirements. If Cortese is aiming to be where he says he is, it would only be logical to be planning a future increase in capacity (either expansion or new build) sooner rather than later.

 

I'm not sure why some of you seem to think a 40-45k stadium is unrealistic.

 

Personally speaking, I'm not for one minute suggesting that a 40K stadium unreasonable. I don't think ANYONE is saying that we definitely won't need to move.

 

What people are saying is this; there is currently no evidence, none at all, to suggest that we will definitely need a bigger stadium. There is absolutely certainly no evidence to support MLG's claims that we need a 50K stadium. Talk of a bigger stadium is massively premature; in Cortese's own words it is a long way away yet.

 

Expanding the stadium to 36,000 would cost around £16M. Expanding to 40,000 would cost £32M. Those are massive sums of money, and Cortese won't just fritter cash away on them for a vanity exercise, he will want to be 100% definite that there is a real need for such an expansion. What I especially am saying is that there are a number of benchmarks which will need to be met before we talk about spending such vast sums, namely:

 

A season ticket base up towards the home allocation capacity;

All match tickets selling out within a few hours of going on sale.

Potential ballotting of tickets for select games to see exactly how many fans above capacity would be prepared to regularly shell out for games.

 

If those conditions are met then I'm sure Cortese will want to expand the stadium. But they will have to met first, we won't be building anything on the whimsical notions of irrelevant statistics and opinion.

[beancounter saint]

Personally speaking, I'm not for one minute suggesting that a 40K stadium unreasonable. I don't think ANYONE is saying that we definitely won't need to move.

 

What people are saying is this; there is currently no evidence, none at all, to suggest that we will definitely need a bigger stadium. There is absolutely certainly no evidence to support MLG's claims that we need a 50K stadium. Talk of a bigger stadium is massively premature; in Cortese's own words it is a long way away yet.

 

Expanding the stadium to 36,000 would cost around £16M. Expanding to 40,000 would cost £32M. Those are massive sums of money, and Cortese won't just fritter cash away on them for a vanity exercise, he will want to be 100% definite that there is a real need for such an expansion. What I especially am saying is that there are a number of benchmarks which will need to be met before we talk about spending such vast sums, namely:

 

A season ticket base up towards the home allocation capacity;

All match tickets selling out within a few hours of going on sale.

Potential ballotting of tickets for select games to see exactly how many fans above capacity would be prepared to regularly shell out for games.

 

If those conditions are met then I'm sure Cortese will want to expand the stadium. But they will have to met first, we won't be building anything on the whimsical notions of irrelevant statistics and opinion.

 

After 5 pages of debate this sums it up nicely. No sound financial basis at all for expansion at the moment. Any "investment" in this would just take money away from other areas where it could be better used.

[um pahars]

8 years ago we were in an economic boom, and in the top flight and we were pretty much always at capacity (even while serving up often awful football).

 

Just under half of our games in the final season of the Premiership weren't sell outs (lowest was 27,000 x 3 occasions). Of the sell outs, only a few were sold out quite a way in advance indicating a sizeable lock out (e.g. Man Utd, Arsenal, Liverpool, Chelsea), whilst other sell outs eventually got there (probably locking a thousand out at most IMHO).

 

 

We had four seasons in the top flight.

 

The first was honeymoon time, with everyone clammering to see what SMS was like. Even then we had at least 7 games that dodn't sell out and were around 30,000 (lowest was 27,000).

 

The second season ended well with our Cup Final, but even that saw half of our games not selling out (with a low of 26,000).

 

The third season was great off the back of a decent league placing, an FA Cup Final appearance and a rise in season ticket sales. A few games didn't sell out, but the majority of those that did only just got there in that they weren't sold out within days. (lowest gate was 30,500).

 

The fourth had about 7 that didn't sell out (lowest of 27,000 on 3 occasions).

 

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not knocking our attendances as I have to say that I thought the were brilliant considering the legacy the Dell had left us with and to be able to double our attendance (and hold it) was impressive.

 

But the talk of needing a 50,000 capacity is risible. Even 40,000 is pushing it and although I'm sure for some of the big games we could fill it with daytrippers who "only came to see United" for others we would probably have 10,000 spare seats rattling around. With hindsight, perhaps St Mary's should have held around 36,000, but that's being really harsh on those who delivered the stadium.

 

Given the sums involved to build a ground and the ROI on it, I struggle to believe that even our fantastic benefactors are going to stump up so much money to provide us with one. If they do (and it doesn't leave us with a millstone) then fair play to them, but I personally wouldn't want it any bigger than late 30,000s (at best) as I wouldn't want to be rattling around in an MK Dons style ground when we play Blackburn, Wigan, Swansea, Bolton, West Brom, Wolves, Fulham, QPR, Stoke etc.

 

Impossible to prove this argument one way or the other, but I think the gut feel of many on here is closer than the pipe dreams of a few (despite whatever Gandhi, Van Goethe, Kennedy, Lincoln might say about minorities).

Edited 6 October, 2011 by um pahars

[Joensuu]

Personally speaking, I'm not for one minute suggesting that a 40K stadium unreasonable. I don't think ANYONE is saying that we definitely won't need to move.

 

What people are saying is this; there is currently no evidence, none at all, to suggest that we will definitely need a bigger stadium. There is absolutely certainly no evidence to support MLG's claims that we need a 50K stadium. Talk of a bigger stadium is massively premature; in Cortese's own words it is a long way away yet.

 

Expanding the stadium to 36,000 would cost around £16M. Expanding to 40,000 would cost £32M. Those are massive sums of money, and Cortese won't just fritter cash away on them for a vanity exercise, he will want to be 100% definite that there is a real need for such an expansion. What I especially am saying is that there are a number of benchmarks which will need to be met before we talk about spending such vast sums, namely:

 

A season ticket base up towards the home allocation capacity;

All match tickets selling out within a few hours of going on sale.

Potential ballotting of tickets for select games to see exactly how many fans above capacity would be prepared to regularly shell out for games.

 

If those conditions are met then I'm sure Cortese will want to expand the stadium. But they will have to met first, we won't be building anything on the whimsical notions of irrelevant statistics and opinion.

 

Agreed. I don't see that there is any definite evidence one way or the other. I also agree that we shouldn't be throwing money away.

 

However, the process of building/redeveloping a stadium takes years. It could easily take 5 years to get any new development planned, approved, funded, and implemented. If Cortese's ambitions are achieved on the pitch, I'm confident our 32k won't be enough in 4-5 years time. As such, I feel this is exactly the right time to be planning ahead, and drawing up a series of options (both for various redevelopments, and for various new-build options). Sure drawing up a range of plans might cost say £50-100k, that's a lot of money, but not a ridiculous amount to spend right now for a team with our ambitions.

 

IMO, now is a good time to plan ahead (to avoid us frittering money away on half-thought-through plans in the future).

[The Kraken]

Agreed. I don't see that there is any definite evidence one way or the other. I also agree that we shouldn't be throwing money away.

 

However, the process of building/redeveloping a stadium takes years. It could easily take 5 years to get any new development planned, approved, funded, and implemented. If Cortese's ambitions are achieved on the pitch, I'm confident our 32k won't be enough in 4-5 years time. As such, I feel this is exactly the right time to be planning ahead, and drawing up a series of options (both for various redevelopments, and for various new-build options). Sure drawing up a range of plans might cost say £50-100k, that's a lot of money, but not a ridiculous amount to spend right now for a team with our ambitions.

 

IMO, now is a good time to plan ahead (to avoid us frittering money away on half-thought-through plans in the future).

 

Personally speaking (and I have nothing to back this up) I'd be surprised if Cortese didn't already have accurate outline costs for how much a stadium capacity increase would cost, and how long it would take. I imagine even basic preliminary plans may exists; if they didn't already when the stadium was built (it was built with future expansion in mind) then it really wouldn't take much to knock new plans up.

 

Furthermore, I would also imagine he has an accurate idea of how much a new ground would cost, and a potential location or two identified. So I doubt he's been sitting on his hands waiting, especially given that he floated the potential of it all very early upon arrival at the club, and since.

[djharvey]

Personally speaking (and I have nothing to back this up) I'd be surprised if Cortese didn't already have accurate outline costs for how much a stadium capacity increase would cost, and how long it would take. I imagine even basic preliminary plans may exists; if they didn't already when the stadium was built (it was built with future expansion in mind) then it really wouldn't take much to knock new plans up.

 

Furthermore, I would also imagine he has an accurate idea of how much a new ground would cost, and a potential location or two identified. So I doubt he's been sitting on his hands waiting, especially given that he floated the potential of it all very early upon arrival at the club, and since.

 

Agree with this.