New Stadium Approved

[The Boofon]

Aye but the South Stand is sinking stinking - it's not.​ it is

 

The pitch needs to be turned around - we don't. needed turned upside down last season.

 

The stadium can't hold European games, we will have to play in Dundee - we'll be fine tnx. This bit needs no correcting

 

Fixed

[Betty Swallicks]

The Poster 'The Hulk' is an architect. He's posted several times why the existing site cannot be updated.

 

Question 1: Is he really an architect?

 

Question 2: Does he live in Westhill?

[RAZOR]

 

Fixed

New Head Groundsman this season funnily enough.

[The Boofon]

 

Question 1: Is he really an architect?

 

Question 2: Does he live in Westhill?

 

Question 1. Yes he is. A bloody good one as well. He's just recently done my new kitchen and roof.

[RAZOR]

 

Question 1: Is he really an architect?

 

Question 2: Does he live in Westhill?

Question 3: how would he gain access to the blue prints of Pittodrie?

 

Question 4: Does he like Deacon Blue?

[The Boofon]

Question 3: how would he gain access to the blue prints of Pittodrie?

 

Question 4: Does he like Deacon Blue?

 

Question 3. Very easily given he's a chartered architect.

 

Question 4. Obviously. Everybody does apart from Poodler who is mad.

[Bamber]

 

For year ending June 2017 so calculated between 1 and 2 years ago.

I will confess I'm amazed by that valuation and would be amazed if we got that in the current market.

 

 

I gave you the link - read it

 

Valuation AS OF 30 June 2017 less than 12 months old

[Betty Swallicks]

 

Question 1. Yes he is. A bloody good one as well. He's just recently done my new kitchen and roof.

 

That's a builder nae an architect.

[The Boofon]

 

That's a builder nae an architect.

 

 

Joiner actually.

 

He did all the drawings you pedantic twat FFS.

[Betty Swallicks]

 

 

Joiner actually.

 

He did all the drawings you pedantic twat FFS.

 

Wooden roof? Good luck with that.

 

On a side note do you know the difference between a carpenter and a joiner?

[Guest RosemountRed]

To use a cliche, but I think the economic climate will dictate how quickly we can deliver the new stadium. I think it will happen but not in the timescale they are predicting right now.

 

Training facilities should be fairly straightforward though and are the most important thing. If we need to wait a little longer for a stadium then so be it, IMO.

 

The training facilities need to start now, no more delays are acceptable.

 

Also very poor that there isn't going to be an indoor pitch.

[Andy_123]

Pittodries land value is calculated based on how many flats could be built there. Not sure what price per house/flat is used to calculate it.

 

The condition of the ground is shite though, so i'd suspect anyone seriously interested in buying the land would be looking for a slightly reduced figure to account for the additional groundworks that would be required there. It might be valued at £15m, but I think we'd be lucky to get that.

 

The Poster 'The Hulk' is an architect. He's posted several times why the existing site cannot be updated.

 

He, I, and a few others have posted numerous times on here why the existing ground cannot be redeveloped WITHIN THE CLUBS BUDGET. Continually ignored by those who don't like what they are reading.

[Betty Swallicks]

Pittodries land value is calculated based on how many flats could be built there. Not sure what price per house/flat is used to calculate it.

 

The condition of the ground is shite though, so i'd suspect anyone seriously interested in buying the land would be looking for a slightly reduced figure to account for the additional groundworks that would be required there. It might be valued at £15m, but I think we'd be lucky to get that.

 

 

He, I, and a few others have posted numerous times on here why the existing ground cannot be redeveloped WITHIN THE CLUBS BUDGET. Continually ignored by those who don't like what they are reading.

 

Is Kingsford within the clubs budget like?

[Betty Swallicks]

 

The training facilities need to start now, no more delays are acceptable.

 

Also very poor that there isn't going to be an indoor pitch.

 

 

 

Forget the stadium at the moment imo. The training facilities are No1 priority.

Funding is still 4mil(ish) short for these at the moment but they need to be spot on so why not push the projected cost from 10mil to say 11mil ?

I don't agree with the mind set of we can build indoor pitch, injury physio hydrotherapy pool etc later.

Lets get the funding in place (which is doable) and finally get a proper state of the art training facility that requires little or nothing more for years to come.

[Bamber]

 

 

The condition of the ground is shite though, so i'd suspect anyone seriously interested in buying the land would be looking for a slightly reduced figure to account for the additional groundworks that would be required there. It might be valued at £15m, but I think we'd be lucky to get that.

 

 

 

 

so what you are saying is that F G Burnett have come in and overvalued the land and then the AFC board have made false representation in a legal document and between the two companies are committing fraud by doing so because it is actually worth less than they have stated?

[Andy_123]

 

Is Kingsford within the clubs budget like?

 

As much as redeveloping Pittodrie is in all honesty.

 

You're quick to say the club can't afford the £20-£25m mortgage or whatever it may be on the new stadium. Hearts single new stand cost £15m, and we need 3, urgently.

 

Say we were to redevelop (and i'm basing these figures on nothing other than Hearts new stand and the fact the rest of the stands are smaller than that);

 

£15m for Main Stand (it's probably reasonably comparable with Hearts new one)

Say £10m for the South Stand (no corporate like the Main Stand)

Say £7.5m for the Merkland Stand (it's a bit smaller)

£10m for the training facilities (based on Kingsford cost)

+ whatever the cost of buying a second site would be

 

£42.5m + the cost of a site, and for all that we get a smaller stadium crammed into an existing site that will now need to conform to current building regulations, and immediately we are £15m ish in funding worse off because we can't sell Pittodrie. All because some people don't want to get on a bus.

 

Explain to us all how that would be more feasible option than Kingsford?

 

And of course you are assuming that the stands can actually be redeveloped one at a time. I've explained on here previously why there's a very real chance that may not even be possible.

[Andy_123]

 

so what you are saying is that F G Burnett have come in and overvalued the land and then the AFC board have made false representation in a legal document and between the two companies are committing fraud by doing so because it is actually worth less than they have stated?

 

That's not what I said though is it.

 

I said the land value is based on the amount of houses/flats that can be built on the site.

 

A developer will have to pay out their own pockets the money to deal with the poor ground conditions, and will therefore likely try to recoup some of that money by trying to pay less for the site in the first place.

[Reliablesource]

 

so what you are saying is that F G Burnett have come in and overvalued the land and then the AFC board have made false representation in a legal document and between the two companies are committing fraud by doing so because it is actually worth less than they have stated?

Hahaha. Aye that's it. Sack the board.

[Bamber]

 

That's not what I said though is it.

 

I said the land value is based on the amount of houses/flats that can be built on the site.

 

A developer will have to pay out their own pockets the money to deal with the poor ground conditions, and will therefore likely try to recoup some of that money by trying to pay less for the site in the first place.

 

 

surely then if its KNOWN that there are poor ground conditions then its KNOWN that valuation method cant be used a independent company would not make such a stupid assumption in its figures and would use a more appropriate method of valuing the land

 

And if it is KNOWN there are poor ground conditions there would have to be a note against the valuation in the report that AFC as a Public Limited company would be expected to note on in its report

 

AFC is using the valuation as a sensitive piece of information that has a clear and undeniable effect on the price of shares in AFC. to not use the best available information is fraudulent.

[Dunty]

Does the Club shop have to be at the new stadium. I can understand the need for training ground and stadium together but the club shop better served in city centre in my opinion. I was going to buy the kids the new home strip before holidays but getting to Pittodrie was a pain in the ass.

 

I'd have bought three full kits if it had been city centre.

The club shop is at its busiest on match days. Would be mad not to have a club shop at the stadium.

[Betty Swallicks]

 

As much as redeveloping Pittodrie is in all honesty.

 

You're quick to say the club can't afford the £20-£25m mortgage or whatever it may be on the new stadium. Hearts single new stand cost £15m, and we need 3, urgently.

 

Say we were to redevelop (and i'm basing these figures on nothing other than Hearts new stand and the fact the rest of the stands are smaller than that);

 

£15m for Main Stand (it's probably reasonably comparable with Hearts new one)

Say £10m for the South Stand (no corporate like the Main Stand)

Say £7.5m for the Merkland Stand (it's a bit smaller)

£10m for the training facilities (based on Kingsford cost)

+ whatever the cost of buying a second site would be

 

£42.5m + the cost of a site, and for all that we get a smaller stadium crammed into an existing site that will now need to conform to current building regulations, and immediately we are £15m ish in funding worse off because we can't sell Pittodrie. All because some people don't want to get on a bus.

 

Explain to us all how that would be more feasible option than Kingsford?

 

And of course you are assuming that the stands can actually be redeveloped one at a time. I've explained on here previously why there's a very real chance that may not even be possible.

 

All those figures prove is that 40mil for the stadium is bollocks.

 

Lets forget the stadium at the moment and concentrate on what is realistically deliverable ie a state of the art training facility.

[V for Vendetta]

 

As much as redeveloping Pittodrie is in all honesty.

 

You're quick to say the club can't afford the £20-£25m mortgage or whatever it may be on the new stadium. Hearts single new stand cost £15m, and we need 3, urgently.

 

Say we were to redevelop (and i'm basing these figures on nothing other than Hearts new stand and the fact the rest of the stands are smaller than that);

 

£15m for Main Stand (it's probably reasonably comparable with Hearts new one)

Say £10m for the South Stand (no corporate like the Main Stand)

Say £7.5m for the Merkland Stand (it's a bit smaller)

£10m for the training facilities (based on Kingsford cost)

+ whatever the cost of buying a second site would be

 

£42.5m + the cost of a site, and for all that we get a smaller stadium crammed into an existing site that will now need to conform to current building regulations, and immediately we are £15m ish in funding worse off because we can't sell Pittodrie. All because some people don't want to get on a bus.

 

Explain to us all how that would be more feasible option than Kingsford?

 

And of course you are assuming that the stands can actually be redeveloped one at a time. I've explained on here previously why there's a very real chance that may not even be possible.

And that's not even allowing for more revenue to be generate at an all new site.

 

Or for the greater appeal to sponsors and investors a brand new facility will likely have.

[Bamber]

Using some statistics regarding stadia

 

Sunderland and Bolton cost around £1000 per seat - Wembley £4000 and Man City cost around £3000 per seat

 

so that puts us around £20m to £80mil

 

£40million for a 20000 Scottish stadium seems more than sensible £2000 per seat

 

Hearts Main stand cost £15million for 7290 seats or £2000 per seat and they didn't have a green field site

[Betty Swallicks]

Using some statistics regarding stadia

 

Sunderland and Bolton cost around £1000 per seat - Wembley £4000 and Man City cost around £3000 per seat

 

so that puts us around £20m to £80mil

 

£40million for a 20000 Scottish stadium seems more than sensible £2000 per seat

 

Hearts Main stand cost £15million for 7290 seats or £2000 per seat and they didn't have a green field site

 

Sunderland and Bolton. Both built over 20 years ago.

Can we build a time machine first? We'll build this fucker for next to nowt.

 

FFS!

[Rostov-on-Don]

Say we were to redevelop (and i'm basing these figures on nothing other than Hearts new stand and the fact the rest of the stands are smaller than that);

 

Hibs accounts said their East Stand came in at £500 a seat or £3.2m, which was far less than they budgeted for. It's essentially a supersize version of St Mirren's stands, cheap and functioning, yet everyone thinks it's great.

[HairyPie]

 

Sunderland and Bolton. Both built over 20 years ago.

Can we build a time machine first? We'll build this fucker for next to nowt.

 

FFS!

 

I know a boy that can get you some Plutonium.

[Betty Swallicks]

 

I know a boy that can get you some Plutonium.

 

Mining for it at Kingsford I believe.

[Andy_123]

 

All those figures prove is that 40mil for the stadium is bollocks.

 

Lets forget the stadium at the moment and concentrate on what is realistically deliverable ie a state of the art training facility.

Not really. The cost of redeveloping stand by stand is always going to be way more expensive than building a new stadium from scratch.

[Bamber]

 

Sunderland and Bolton. Both built over 20 years ago.

Can we build a time machine first? We'll build this fucker for next to nowt.

 

FFS!

 

Which is why I didnt use £1000 per seat. And as pointed Hibs came in st 500 per seat. Hearts at 2000 per seat despite a complicated build. Kings ford at 1500 to 2000 per seat seems reasonable statistically sound so 30M to 40M

[V for Vendetta]

Which is why I didnt use £1000 per seat. And as pointed Hibs came in st 500 per seat. Hearts at 2000 per seat despite a complicated build. Kings ford at 1500 to 2000 per seat seems reasonable statistically sound so 30M to 40M

I think your figures were pretty sensible considering the data available.

 

Bit of an unbalanced reaction from Betty.