Main stand budget

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

Main stand budget

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 3 of 4 < 1 2 3 4 >

Midlands Eagle 27 May 21 7.02am
Originally posted by Ginger Pubic Wig Would love to see the link ME [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

Midlands Eagle

27 May 21 7.02am

Send a Private Message to Midlands Eagle

Originally posted by Ginger Pubic Wig

Would love to see the link ME

[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

Ginger Pubic Wig Wickham de L'Ouest 27 May 21 10.27pm
Thanks. Doesn't seem rich enough to buy us. If you want to live in a world full of kindness, respect and love, try to show these qualities.
Alert a moderator to this post

Ginger Pubic Wig

Wickham de L'Ouest 27 May 21 10.27pm

Send a Private Message to Ginger Pubic Wig

Thanks. Doesn't seem rich enough to buy us.

If you want to live in a world full of kindness, respect and love, try to show these qualities.

Alert a moderator to this post

Elpis In a pub 29 May 21 8.50am
Every pound we have needs investing in the team . No point having a super stadium in league one . I do think there should be a height restriction in the main stand though , the seats are not fit for purpose for anyone over 5'2'
Alert a moderator to this post

Elpis

In a pub 29 May 21 8.50am

Every pound we have needs investing in the team . No point having a super stadium in league one .

I do think there should be a height restriction in the main stand though , the seats are not fit for purpose for anyone over 5'2'

Alert a moderator to this post

jeeagles 31 May 21 12.41pm
Originally posted by Elpis Every pound we have needs investing in the team . No point having a super stadium in league one . I do think there should be a height restriction in the main stand though , the seats are not fit for purpose for anyone over 5'2' Leicester, Southampton, Wolves all invested in their stadiums whilst in the Premiership, went down to league 1, then came back with new owners stronger than ever. Hull, Brighton, Swansea, Cardiff, Reading, Stoke all invested in their stadiums prior to their relatively recent successful spells in the Premiership. The team is now as stable in the prem as it ever will be with an aging 26,000 seater stadium. We need to invest. As for leg room. There's a few people who have questioned Leitch's designs across the country. Whilst attractive there seem to be limited consideration given to function and comfort. At least 3 stadium disasters have occurred at grounds designed by him. Although anyone questioning his designs need to put on a tin hat first.
Alert a moderator to this post

jeeagles

31 May 21 12.41pm

Originally posted by Elpis

Every pound we have needs investing in the team . No point having a super stadium in league one .

I do think there should be a height restriction in the main stand though , the seats are not fit for purpose for anyone over 5'2'

Leicester, Southampton, Wolves all invested in their stadiums whilst in the Premiership, went down to league 1, then came back with new owners stronger than ever.

Hull, Brighton, Swansea, Cardiff, Reading, Stoke all invested in their stadiums prior to their relatively recent successful spells in the Premiership.

The team is now as stable in the prem as it ever will be with an aging 26,000 seater stadium. We need to invest.

As for leg room. There's a few people who have questioned Leitch's designs across the country. Whilst attractive there seem to be limited consideration given to function and comfort. At least 3 stadium disasters have occurred at grounds designed by him. Although anyone questioning his designs need to put on a tin hat first.

Alert a moderator to this post

Pierre Purley 31 May 21 2.13pm
Originally posted by jeeagles Leicester, Southampton, Wolves all invested in their stadiums whilst in the Premiership, went down to league 1, then came back with new owners stronger than ever. Hull, Brighton, Swansea, Cardiff, Reading, Stoke all invested in their stadiums prior to their relatively recent successful spells in the Premiership. The team is now as stable in the prem as it ever will be with an aging 26,000 seater stadium. We need to invest. As for leg room. There's a few people who have questioned Leitch's designs across the country. Whilst attractive there seem to be limited consideration given to function and comfort. At least 3 stadium disasters have occurred at grounds designed by him. Although anyone questioning his designs need to put on a tin hat first. Investing in the stadium by way of a new stand is fine and relatively easy. However:- 1. Negotiating a sensible price with Sainsbury's for a strip of land. 2. Finding and buying appropriate land in Croydon to build 6 houses. Points 1 & 2 are proving time consuming and potentially very costly. Until they are solved the club cannot move on or forwards and start on the stadium plans. There are also new tougher London Assembley and Council requirements on matchday traffic, parking, residential, transport and stewarding requirements but I am sure the club can easily reach the minimum requirements on these.
Alert a moderator to this post

Pierre

Purley 31 May 21 2.13pm

Originally posted by jeeagles

Leicester, Southampton, Wolves all invested in their stadiums whilst in the Premiership, went down to league 1, then came back with new owners stronger than ever.

Hull, Brighton, Swansea, Cardiff, Reading, Stoke all invested in their stadiums prior to their relatively recent successful spells in the Premiership.

The team is now as stable in the prem as it ever will be with an aging 26,000 seater stadium. We need to invest.

Investing in the stadium by way of a new stand is fine and relatively easy. However:-
1. Negotiating a sensible price with Sainsbury's for a strip of land.
2. Finding and buying appropriate land in Croydon to build 6 houses.
Points 1 & 2 are proving time consuming and potentially very costly.
Until they are solved the club cannot move on or forwards and start on the stadium plans.
There are also new tougher London Assembley and Council requirements on matchday traffic, parking, residential, transport and stewarding requirements but I am sure the club can easily reach the minimum requirements on these.

Alert a moderator to this post

Pierre Purley 31 May 21 2.14pm
nvesting in the stadium by way of a new stand is fine and relatively easy. However:- 1. Negotiating a sensible price with Sainsbury's for a strip of land. 2. Finding and buying appropriate land in Croydon to build 6 houses. Points 1 & 2 are proving time consuming and potentially very costly. Until they are solved the club cannot move on or forwards and start on the stadium plans. There are also new tougher London Assembley and Council requirements on matchday traffic, parking, residential, transport and stewarding requirements but I am sure the club can easily reach the minimum requirements on these.
Alert a moderator to this post

Pierre

Purley 31 May 21 2.14pm

nvesting in the stadium by way of a new stand is fine and relatively easy. However:-
1. Negotiating a sensible price with Sainsbury's for a strip of land.
2. Finding and buying appropriate land in Croydon to build 6 houses.
Points 1 & 2 are proving time consuming and potentially very costly.
Until they are solved the club cannot move on or forwards and start on the stadium plans.
There are also new tougher London Assembley and Council requirements on matchday traffic, parking, residential, transport and stewarding requirements but I am sure the club can easily reach the minimum requirements on these.

Alert a moderator to this post

TheBigToePunt 01 Jun 21 9.52am
Buying the land from Sainsburys and the land for six new houses are obstacles that could have been overcome by now. Something else is up. Reading between the lines of Parish' last interview, I got the impression that he is concerned with taking the plunge and spending £100m with no way to recoup it if we were to get relegated, which at some stage a club our size inevitably will no matter what we do. If we had a more sellable, valuable squad he might feel we have a cushion in place, but if we had gone down this season then who could we sell to balance the books, let alone offset the cost of the stand? Whilst the Americans were supposedly here to invest in the infrastructure (and let's not forget that the academy has been built at the cost of tens of millions), they dish out loans, not gifts, and I'd say Parish has gotten the wobbles on taking out such a large loan without enough assets to pay it off.
Alert a moderator to this post

TheBigToePunt

01 Jun 21 9.52am

Buying the land from Sainsburys and the land for six new houses are obstacles that could have been overcome by now. Something else is up. Reading between the lines of Parish' last interview, I got the impression that he is concerned with taking the plunge and spending £100m with no way to recoup it if we were to get relegated, which at some stage a club our size inevitably will no matter what we do.

If we had a more sellable, valuable squad he might feel we have a cushion in place, but if we had gone down this season then who could we sell to balance the books, let alone offset the cost of the stand?

Whilst the Americans were supposedly here to invest in the infrastructure (and let's not forget that the academy has been built at the cost of tens of millions), they dish out loans, not gifts, and I'd say Parish has gotten the wobbles on taking out such a large loan without enough assets to pay it off.

Alert a moderator to this post

Badger11 Beckenham 01 Jun 21 10.11am
Originally posted by TheBigToePunt Buying the land from Sainsburys and the land for six new houses are obstacles that could have been overcome by now. Something else is up. Reading between the lines of Parish' last interview, I got the impression that he is concerned with taking the plunge and spending £100m with no way to recoup it if we were to get relegated, which at some stage a club our size inevitably will no matter what we do. If we had a more sellable, valuable squad he might feel we have a cushion in place, but if we had gone down this season then who could we sell to balance the books, let alone offset the cost of the stand? Whilst the Americans were supposedly here to invest in the infrastructure (and let's not forget that the academy has been built at the cost of tens of millions), they dish out loans, not gifts, and I'd say Parish has gotten the wobbles on taking out such a large loan without enough assets to pay it off. My feeling as well and if correct Parrish is probably right to be cautious considering our financial history. One more point
Alert a moderator to this post

Badger11

Beckenham 01 Jun 21 10.11am

Originally posted by TheBigToePunt

Whilst the Americans were supposedly here to invest in the infrastructure (and let's not forget that the academy has been built at the cost of tens of millions), they dish out loans, not gifts, and I'd say Parish has gotten the wobbles on taking out such a large loan without enough assets to pay it off.

My feeling as well and if correct Parrish is probably right to be cautious considering our financial history.

One more point

Alert a moderator to this post

TheBigToePunt 01 Jun 21 12.54pm
Originally posted by Badger11 My feeling as well and if correct Parrish is probably right to be cautious considering our financial history. Yes, I certainly wouldn't criticise him for it, though of course, the flip side is that if the stand doesn't go up then the income it will generate doesn't start coming in. This is where the nature of the Americans role is unclear. I would have hoped Parish pinned them down to a commitment to pay for the stand regardless, but perhaps that's not how it works. If they came on board in a more general capacity as joint-owners then I imagine they are looking at the same set of figures as Parish, and have the same concerns about sticking another £100m of their money into the club.
Alert a moderator to this post

TheBigToePunt

01 Jun 21 12.54pm

Originally posted by Badger11

My feeling as well and if correct Parrish is probably right to be cautious considering our financial history.

Yes, I certainly wouldn't criticise him for it, though of course, the flip side is that if the stand doesn't go up then the income it will generate doesn't start coming in. This is where the nature of the Americans role is unclear. I would have hoped Parish pinned them down to a commitment to pay for the stand regardless, but perhaps that's not how it works. If they came on board in a more general capacity as joint-owners then I imagine they are looking at the same set of figures as Parish, and have the same concerns about sticking another £100m of their money into the club.

Alert a moderator to this post

orpingtoneagle Orpington 01 Jun 21 2.30pm
Is this just a warning not to over promise then under deliver? Personally I have never believed this would be built in my lifetime but that's irrelevant in the grander scheme. I wish Parish would simply say yes or no rather than making excuses (and they are excuses as there have been far more complex buildings with far greater planning issues completed in half the time.) Edited by orpingtoneagle (01 Jun 2021 10.35pm)
Alert a moderator to this post

orpingtoneagle

Orpington 01 Jun 21 2.30pm

Send a Private Message to orpingtoneagle

Is this just a warning not to over promise then under deliver?

Personally I have never believed this would be built in my lifetime but that's irrelevant in the grander scheme.

I wish Parish would simply say yes or no rather than making excuses (and they are excuses as there have been far more complex buildings with far greater planning issues completed in half the time.)

Edited by orpingtoneagle (01 Jun 2021 10.35pm)

Alert a moderator to this post

grumpymort US/Thailand/UK 01 Jun 21 3.16pm
Originally posted by TheBigToePunt Buying the land from Sainsburys and the land for six new houses are obstacles that could have been overcome by now. Something else is up. Reading between the lines of Parish' last interview, I got the impression that he is concerned with taking the plunge and spending £100m with no way to recoup it if we were to get relegated, which at some stage a club our size inevitably will no matter what we do. If we had a more sellable, valuable squad he might feel we have a cushion in place, but if we had gone down this season then who could we sell to balance the books, let alone offset the cost of the stand? Whilst the Americans were supposedly here to invest in the infrastructure (and let's not forget that the academy has been built at the cost of tens of millions), they dish out loans, not gifts, and I'd say Parish has gotten the wobbles on taking out such a large loan without enough assets to pay it off. Even if they had solved those two issues you mentioned it still wouldn't go ahead other issues are unresolved one of them is the transport links this was something which was flagged up and Palace paid out more money to parties to try resolve this and it resulted in still being rejected. I said it at the start his numbers never added up he claimed it would be used for events and others things and would only cost this amount which was typical of him smoke & mirrors. The Americans have done plenty enough people need to stop being so closed minded trying to blame them all the time they put funds in and yes they have given loans which was for transfers something which was clearly stated at the begin they was not going to be involved in. Everything comes back to SP at the end of the day he needs to go I expect had he not been their we would of had new ownership. SP since being in Prem has contributed fiance wise 0 yet people will defend him to the end. (VPN) - [Link] (Alt VPN) - [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

grumpymort

US/Thailand/UK 01 Jun 21 3.16pm

Originally posted by TheBigToePunt

Even if they had solved those two issues you mentioned it still wouldn't go ahead other issues are unresolved one of them is the transport links this was something which was flagged up and Palace paid out more money to parties to try resolve this and it resulted in still being rejected.

I said it at the start his numbers never added up he claimed it would be used for events and others things and would only cost this amount which was typical of him smoke & mirrors.

The Americans have done plenty enough people need to stop being so closed minded trying to blame them all the time they put funds in and yes they have given loans which was for transfers something which was clearly stated at the begin they was not going to be involved in.

Everything comes back to SP at the end of the day he needs to go I expect had he not been their we would of had new ownership.

SP since being in Prem has contributed fiance wise 0 yet people will defend him to the end.

(VPN) - [Link]
(Alt VPN) - [Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

Spiderman Horsham 01 Jun 21 3.28pm
Originally posted by grumpymort Even if they had solved those two issues you mentioned it still wouldn't go ahead other issues are unresolved one of them is the transport links this was something which was flagged up and Palace paid out more money to parties to try resolve this and it resulted in still being rejected. I said it at the start his numbers never added up he claimed it would be used for events and others things and would only cost this amount which was typical of him smoke & mirrors. The Americans have done plenty enough people need to stop being so closed minded trying to blame them all the time they put funds in and yes they have given loans which was for transfers something which was clearly stated at the begin they was not going to be involved in. Everything comes back to SP at the end of the day he needs to go I expect had he not been their we would of had new ownership. SP since being in Prem has contributed fiance wise 0 yet people will defend him to the end. I have said on several occasions I believe we may have lost, good, potential buyers, due to SP possibly not wanting to give up his role ( any new buyers would surely want their own team in). However with regard to the US owners, not sure they have given as much as they could have and I am sure they are keeping more than just one eye on their investment. Maybe the threat of relegation stirred them into investing when BFS was manager. Perhaps they should now look to be investing more, to kick us onto the next level. If we could start challenging for Europe their investment would be worth even more
Alert a moderator to this post

Spiderman

Horsham 01 Jun 21 3.28pm

Originally posted by grumpymort

I said it at the start his numbers never added up he claimed it would be used for events and others things and would only cost this amount which was typical of him smoke & mirrors.

Everything comes back to SP at the end of the day he needs to go I expect had he not been their we would of had new ownership.

SP since being in Prem has contributed fiance wise 0 yet people will defend him to the end.

I have said on several occasions I believe we may have lost, good, potential buyers, due to SP possibly not wanting to give up his role ( any new buyers would surely want their own team in). However with regard to the US owners, not sure they have given as much as they could have and I am sure they are keeping more than just one eye on their investment. Maybe the threat of relegation stirred them into investing when BFS was manager. Perhaps they should now look to be investing more, to kick us onto the next level. If we could start challenging for Europe their investment would be worth even more

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 3 of 4 < 1 2 3 4 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

Main stand budget

Site Map

New users

Existing users

Sponsors