Here's what you're getting folks!NewCrossGreen":ak64dxm4 said:
http://m.thisissouthdevon.co.uk/story.h ... ate=dialog
-
This site is sponsored by Lang & Potter.
http://m.thisissouthdevon.co.uk/story.h ... ate=dialog
N
NewCrossGreen
Guest
Well let’s hope you’re right; although the problem is that there are several possible scenarios, of which yours is but one. It is clear that things aren’t what they first appear. People like Chris Web, IJN and others probably know a lot more about what’s going on than the rest of us; but the point is, if everyone behaves as if nothing is the matter – the cheap and cheerful option might, by default, win through. What concerns me is that Akkeron and other investors will, quite naturally, be looking for the maximum return on their investment. The question is: does that maximum return objective involve the small grandstand with the ice-rink adjacent; or does include a much larger grandstand with ice-rink in Cottage Field – I don’t know – and I believe you don’t know either – unless, of course, you know something the rest of us don’t.
Maybe the reason he don't want to attempt to get planning permission for Cottage field is because he has held talks with the friends of Central Park and they said they would oppose any application thus delaying the entire project. I have said before I find it very strange why the Friends of Central Park have been so quiet on this proposal unless I have simply missed it. When we have had proposals like this before there have been a huge out cry from them about any commercial development on Central Park.
I am only putting this forward as an idea for the reluctance of building on a bigger plot of land which you would think a developer would jump at.
I am only putting this forward as an idea for the reluctance of building on a bigger plot of land which you would think a developer would jump at.
N
NewCrossGreen
Guest
Without opposition, building on cottage Field would be fairly straightforward because it is earmarked for development; but for JB, time is of the essence, in that, the old stand is due for demolition in September – and that is a maximum of five months away – in terms of a large development, that is next week.
JB has yet to respond to PASOTI questions; the two supporter groups have yet to decide what strategy to adopt; the revised plans, if revised at all, have to be drawn up and examined, and then put through the PCC planning process. All this is a big ask in such a short time – particularly if there is genuine consultation with the supporters. Keyham Pilgrim’s point about the silence of Friends of Central Park assumes more significance in the light of this – although hopefully not.
Just to put my two-penneth in, I attended the PASB meeting before the Exeter game where JB and a colleague gave a presentation outlining the plans for development, as well as potential expansion options for the already existing horseshoe stands. All in all it seemed like an extremely sensible proposal. JB made it quite clear that one of his key aims through this development is to give Argyle non-match-day income - something that we sorely need and have needed for a long time.
I understand some people's objections that a ground with an initial capacity of only 17,500 seems to be "killing the dream", but I think we all need to take a reality check here. 2 years ago or so we very, very nearly went out of existence. We are still losing money every week that goes by. We are not yet in a financially sustainable position. To build several thousand extra seats that we cannot sell at the moment on a regular basis (with perhaps the odd exception of a high profile cup tie, or massive home derby at Xmas/Easter time) is just foolhardy. The proposal as it is outlined currently would put us on an even keel and give us the ability to move up the leagues and establish ourselves in the Championship. I think questions about what we would do if/when we reach the Premiership can be addressed when we get there!
Those who think JB's only interests are in how much money he can make for Akkeron etc. clearly don't understand the man. I honestly think we need to be so grateful that we have someone of his calibre and integrity in charge of our club at this time. Just look at the Venkys at Blackburn or Vincent Tan at Cardiff! We should all appreciate how lucky we are.
I understand some people's objections that a ground with an initial capacity of only 17,500 seems to be "killing the dream", but I think we all need to take a reality check here. 2 years ago or so we very, very nearly went out of existence. We are still losing money every week that goes by. We are not yet in a financially sustainable position. To build several thousand extra seats that we cannot sell at the moment on a regular basis (with perhaps the odd exception of a high profile cup tie, or massive home derby at Xmas/Easter time) is just foolhardy. The proposal as it is outlined currently would put us on an even keel and give us the ability to move up the leagues and establish ourselves in the Championship. I think questions about what we would do if/when we reach the Premiership can be addressed when we get there!
Those who think JB's only interests are in how much money he can make for Akkeron etc. clearly don't understand the man. I honestly think we need to be so grateful that we have someone of his calibre and integrity in charge of our club at this time. Just look at the Venkys at Blackburn or Vincent Tan at Cardiff! We should all appreciate how lucky we are.
GreenishHugh":23ixwnen said:
Hugh, the potential expansion options for the horseshoe will never happen. The first option had severely restricted views from necessary columns to support the extra rows, and the second had an overhang that again restricted views dramatically. Both options were costly and had severe engineering concerns with both the present foundations and the proposed access roads being huge hurdles. It is NOT a case of just popping an extra tier on, as Brighton have done.
The third option was to rebuild the Devonport completely, something which would prove extremely costly and was only a vague thought from the Akkeron architect, illustrated by the abundance of (actual) question marks on the slides used. Again, not a goer. And it goes without saying the grandstand will be non-expandable. The answer is to use Cottage Field and build a bigger grandstand. Something which James Brent admitted was the 'magic answer'.
As for the non-matchday income, I've seen no evidence of any drastically increased income from the slightly upgraded banqueting, non-dedicated conference facilities and the still-small club shop. Add to that the retail units in the stand not contributing to Argyle in any way, and you have some major, and very justified, concerns over any potential increased income.
There is the possibility that safe-standing will take-off at some point in the future therby enabling us to increase capacity without any major works. Two persons per current seat so the capacity of the Devonport end could effectively be double if that was the chosen area to introduce the option. A long-shot I grant you but a possibility at some point in the future. I recall seeing photos of JB in a safe-standing promo so he's aware of it and maybe backs it?
Fair enough Postey but where/what are these 7 day a week income generators for the club which I agree are sorely needed? There doesn't seem to be any clear indications of where they will come from or what they might be compared to what we have at present. They are certainly going to fall well short of what was indicated up until recently. That is a worry for many. I also worry that 17,500 or 16,800ish with segregation etc. is leaving us in the future even less capable than before of becoming an established Championship club and capable of making the ultimate push for the top league at any time in the future. Unless JB is playing a game over Cottage Field and is going to come up with a late plan to move the Ice rink there and give us the extra 2-2,500 seats most would be over the moon with I fear our future will be as a decent League 1 club on average and nothing more bar the odd season or two above that. Cottage Field, Sponsorship, Debentures etc. are all things I would rather see explored as a means of getting those extra couple of thousand seats rather than just accept what even the most compliant fan must surely admit is a hugely disappointing new main stand. Those calling for capacities of 22-25,000 are in a small minority, I think the overwhelming majority would be delighted if a way was found to get to 19,500 to 20,000 seats. Our only remaining hope is the safe standing option at some future point but it still leaves us with an admittedly modern new stand with some improved facilities but non league almost in it's stature.
N
NewCrossGreen
Guest
I agree, it does sound sensible and realistic, but its complete nonsense.
The new grandstand represents a one and only opportunity for stadium development for many years to come – barring a sugar daddy. This is it, there won’t be anything else. If JB wants to do more than the minimum, he should heighten the roof and put an in an extra ten rows of seats – that is the absolute bare minimum I would be willing to accept; although I also think the corner with the Devonport should have seats too.
PL2 3DQ":18hnbreh said:
Right... With respect, I have outlined major issues (the same ones that everyone seems to have) with every point in GH's post, that are in the public domain. Postey, one of your big strengths is digging for info and asking questions. I can't fathom why you're so reluctant to do that with this development. Either you don't think any questions at all are necessary, or you've already asked them and are happy with the answers. Can you please enlighten us?
GreenishHugh":3vb8f9p1 said:
But what exactly are the plans for the new "non-match-day income"? That's the question unanswered.
We currently have the Far Post club, GT fan Fests, Club shop, car park / car boot sales, what new additional revenue streams will be pouring into Argyle. I think we were told: Sponsorship, hospitility & new Club shop. Will they really bring in significantly more than existing, or more to the point, more than could exist if the existing resources were fully exploited and enough to sustain a promotion push from the Championship as originally stated upon takeover.
The issue is that the new stand is financed by the profits from the development at no cost to the club. At present, with the non-profit making Ice Rink forming a large part of the development, James Brent can only afford to build a 4,8000 seater stand. If the Ice Rink is moved to Cottage Field it will make space available for additional profitable development which will provide the finance for a larger stand. The "Magic Answer".GreenishHugh":1eme74mp said:
