Main Stand redevelopment thread

[est1905]

the answer is that Chelsea utilised their big squad and did play a few youngsters e.g. George upfront, however, as they progressed the team got stronger each round and they played a full team in the final.

Can we get back to the Main Stand discussion now.

Now the 6 houses are being knocked down hopefully we shall see some progress this year. Let's just hope we don't get relegated once it's built as per Chelsea in the early 80s

This

 

[est1905]

The question is not whether other Championship (or even League One) clubs would have better stadiums than ours. The question is whether, if we were in the Championship, we could sell enough seats and corporate boxes in the new stand to cover the payments for it.

This very knowledgeable looking source confirms what we all know: Palace do not get close to selling out even the existing capacity if in the Championship, and often the average attendance, even when we have a good team fighting for promotion, is thousands short of capacity.

Average attendances

Crystal Palace Supporters' Website

www.holmesdale.net

Hence the white elephant risk.

The reason for this is a lack of faith in the team to get promotion. The longer we stay in the Prem (hopefully many more years to come) the more fans will stick with the team in the event of a relegation in the realistic hope of an instant return.
People that think 35,000 that turned up to watch City in the third tier are deluded if they think that was just loyal support from a bigger club. It was because they were hoping/expecting to see City smash everyone every week. Even fans aren't always loyal to a club that is failing.
My bet is if Palace stayed in the Prem for another ten years and then got relegated the fans will be queuing round the block to watch us tear up the Championship.

 

[TheBigToePunt]

That was 14 years ago. The club has evolved.

We cannot stand still as a club. We did that for years and that is why we failed to cement a top level berth.
The money available for stadium development is not solely dependent on our league status. We have owners worth billions of dollars. We also have assets on the field.

Perhaps we have evolved, but to the point of needing a 34000 seat stadium in the Championship? That is double our average attendance last time we were in that league, or any time we've been in it in modern memory.

All available evidence is clear that we only need the new stand in the top flight. That doesn't mean it wouldn't be nice, or beneficial otherwise, but it isn't evidently needed unless we are at the top table.

The other thing is paying for it. The owners aren't going to pay for the stand, are they? The club is, including by way of a loan of at least £125m which will need to be paid back. To do that we need income, and we would have a lot less of it one division down. In that respect money for the stand is entirely dependant on league status. It will take x years to pay for itself if sold out every week at premier league ticket prices, but a lot longer otherwise, if it can be done at all.

Yes, assets on the field was my original point. They are an insurance policy that we just didn't have in 2018. Lets hope we never need to cash in on them, at least not to cover the stand debt, but to my mind they must be the best guard against risk that a club can have.

 

[TheBigToePunt]

The reason for this is a lack of faith in the team to get promotion. The longer we stay in the Prem (hopefully many more years to come) the more fans will stick with the team in the event of a relegation in the realistic hope of an instant return.
People that think 35,000 that turned up to watch City in the third tier are deluded if they think that was just loyal support from a bigger club. It was because they were hoping/expecting to see City smash everyone every week. Even fans aren't always loyal to a club that is failing.
My bet is if Palace stayed in the Prem for another ten years and then got relegated the fans will be queuing round the block to watch us tear up the Championship.

I'll have some of what you're having! 😉

Seriously, I am sure the club have a contingency plan to pay for the stand if we get relegated, as that is a constant possibility over the time it will take us to pay it off. I would be surprised if it involved a presumption of 34000 sell out crowds, though.

Lets hope we never find out!

 

[Hrolf The Ganger]

Perhaps we have evolved, but to the point of needing a 34000 seat stadium in the Championship? That is double our average attendance last time we were in that league, or any time we've been in it in modern memory.

All available evidence is clear that we only need the new stand in the top flight. That doesn't mean it wouldn't be nice, or beneficial otherwise, but it isn't evidently needed unless we are at the top table.

The other thing is paying for it. The owners aren't going to pay for the stand, are they? The club is, including by way of a loan of at least £125m which will need to be paid back. To do that we need income, and we would have a lot less of it one division down. In that respect money for the stand is entirely dependant on league status. It will take x years to pay for itself if sold out every week at premier league ticket prices, but a lot longer otherwise, if it can be done at all.

Yes, assets on the field was my original point. They are an insurance policy that we just didn't have in 2018. Lets hope we never need to cash in on them, at least not to cover the stand debt, but to my mind they must be the best guard against risk that a club can have.

I think you need to forget about the 34k and focus on the wooden relic that is laughably referred to as the Main Stand. It is not fit for a professional club in the 21st century.
We don't know what the arrangements are for the loan, so any discussion is speculation.
Also remember that costs in the Championship go down as well as income.

I would be staggered if relegation halted the build. It just makes no long term sense for anyone.

 

[mtp1958]

Knocked anything else down today?

Yes £2 off rioja in sainsbury 👍🏻

 

[Linford]

To be fair, TalkSport is a radio station aimed to do nothing but stir up the listener until they call in and have a long (expensive) rant on air. Being a total gobsh*te has to be the only requirement for hosting on it. I have some mixed feelings about Simon J but it's pretty obvious he's on there because they knew his tripe would bait the right people.

Oh absolutely it's the reason he got the job, and as you say they knew he was suited to it. Out of all of their panel he is the worst, or in their eyes I suppose the best, in doing just that.

Most often he contradicts his own argument before it's even finished. As soon as it appears someone has "beat" him, he turns about on a 180 degree angle and makes out that was his position all along.

The only think he has ever been consistent with, is having a personal vendetta against Parish. Maybe he has some valid reasons, maybe not, but since he changes the details of his own reasoning every moment we can't take his word for anything.

 

[Linford]

For our club it was an amazing achievement, for a premier league club, its really nothing to shout about, you should be winning it. Its only been around a few years and us, West ham and chelsea u21s have already won it. Brighton will be faves next year and I'd be more shocked if they dont win it.

It wasn't in any way Chelsea U21s or Chelsea Reserves. They put out their main XI in the competition. They themselves treated it just as seriously as the Champions League or Europa League.

 

[martin2412]

Perhaps we have evolved, but to the point of needing a 34000 seat stadium in the Championship? That is double our average attendance last time we were in that league, or any time we've been in it in modern memory.

All available evidence is clear that we only need the new stand in the top flight. That doesn't mean it wouldn't be nice, or beneficial otherwise, but it isn't evidently needed unless we are at the top table.

The other thing is paying for it. The owners aren't going to pay for the stand, are they? The club is, including by way of a loan of at least £125m which will need to be paid back. To do that we need income, and we would have a lot less of it one division down. In that respect money for the stand is entirely dependant on league status. It will take x years to pay for itself if sold out every week at premier league ticket prices, but a lot longer otherwise, if it can be done at all.

Yes, assets on the field was my original point. They are an insurance policy that we just didn't have in 2018. Lets hope we never need to cash in on them, at least not to cover the stand debt, but to my mind they must be the best guard against risk that a club can have.

£125M is a drop in the ocean in today's game. That's just an Elliot Anderson

 

[MrRobbo]

Oh absolutely it's the reason he got the job, and as you say they knew he was suited to it. Out of all of their panel he is the worst, or in their eyes I suppose the best, in doing just that.

Most often he contradicts his own argument before it's even finished. As soon as it appears someone has "beat" him, he turns about on a 180 degree angle and makes out that was his position all along.

The only think he has ever been consistent with, is having a personal vendetta against Parish. Maybe he has some valid reasons, maybe not, but since he changes the details of his own reasoning every moment we can't take his word for anything.

100%.

He's paid to have strong opinions and to be divisive.

 

[Linford]

There are teams with better stadiums in League One.

Obviously Sunderland are back in the big game now and giving a good crack of it for themselves too, but for a long period of time the Stadium of Light was in League One and the Championship.

It was a way superior stadium for the division it was in. It was even then, one of the most prestigious stadiums in the country. It held more England matches than St James' Park.

Most likely an asset that has helped them get back to where they are now.

 

[Linford]

100%.

He's paid to have strong opinions and to be divisive.

And then to change them at the drop of a hat and fein ignorance.

 

[Linford]

The question is not whether other Championship (or even League One) clubs would have better stadiums than ours. The question is whether, if we were in the Championship, we could sell enough seats and corporate boxes in the new stand to cover the payments for it.

This very knowledgeable looking source confirms what we all know: Palace do not get close to selling out even the existing capacity if in the Championship, and often the average attendance, even when we have a good team fighting for promotion, is thousands short of capacity.

Average attendances

Crystal Palace Supporters' Website

www.holmesdale.net

Hence the white elephant risk.

Historic attendances in the Championship don't necessarily reflect what they would be if we did succumb to the drop.

A lot has changed about the club since we went up 13 years ago. The feeling around the club is different, and would be different in that scenario. It's that feeling that can make all the difference.

When there isn't any hope around the place, it's a lot harder to put bums in seats.

 

[Linford]

Which is meaningless if you haven’t got the turnover, as Newcastle have found out

Part of the reason why we are building the new stand. (To increase turnover).

 

[TheBigToePunt]

£125M is a drop in the ocean in today's game. That's just an Elliot Anderson

It's not a lot of money to Man City, but its still a lot to Palace. Especially if we were relegated.

I take your point, though, and I think we are saying much the same thing; In 2018 the idea that we could cover the cost of the stand with player sales was mad. We had very few assets, and those we had (Zaha?) were not going to raise half that sum. Nowadays, we could cover the cost by selling two players perhaps? Maybe Lacroix and Wharton? We might even have some change afterwards.

As I started off by saying, that must help Parish sleep a lot better than he would have done if we had bitten the bullet in 2018.

 

[Caterham]

Historic attendances in the Championship don't necessarily reflect what they would be if we did succumb to the drop.

A lot has changed about the club since we went up 13 years ago. The feeling around the club is different, and would be different in that scenario. It's that feeling that can make all the difference.

When there isn't any hope around the place, it's a lot harder to put bums in seats.

A lot has changed in the Championship too, clubs spending more, fans that cant see PL matches going to lower tier matches, more TV coverage, more games on a Saturday afternoon rather than on a Sunday etc etc

 

[Stirlingsays]

If we don't rebuild the stadium to at least compete for higher attendance than we will never progress as a club.

I don't see the logic in arguing to remain a 26,000 attendance club. It is a championship mindset when in truth we are a mid table Premiership club.

Those who say we can never get to a bigger club status have to weigh that view with the reality that we have and have moved up massively in terms of status and wealth during the Parish era.

People are always calling for the club to spend big on this or that player. Personally I feel the Stadium represents a real step forward both in status for the club and in inherent worth now that we actually own the thing.

It would be the Parish and co legacy and to an extent the Freedman legacy.

Personally I think it's the correct decision.

 

[TheBigToePunt]

Obviously Sunderland are back in the big game now and giving a good crack of it for themselves too, but for a long period of time the Stadium of Light was in League One and the Championship.

It was a way superior stadium for the division it was in. It was even then, one of the most prestigious stadiums in the country. It held more England matches than St James' Park.

Most likely an asset that has helped them get back to where they are now.

Sunderlands ground was generally no more than two-thirds full outside the top flight at best, even with lower ticket prices. They generally closed off the whole upper tier of the main stand, plus other bits.

More to the point, Sunderland weren't still paying for their stadium when they were in the lower leagues last time around. We would still be paying for the stand.

I'm not saying it can't be done. I'm not saying we shouldn't do it. I'm just saying that relegation is hard enough financially as it is. If you add in £125m of stand debt on top then thank Christ we have some players worth selling. None of us know the details of the loan or what clauses it contains, but it seems entirely feasible to me that the value of our squad may be relevant to the finances and decision-making regarding the stand.

 

[TheBigToePunt]

If we don't rebuild the stadium to at least compete for higher attendance than we will never progress as a club.

I don't see the logic in arguing to remain a 26,000 attendance club. It is a championship mindset when in truth we are a mid table Premiership club.

Those who say we can never get to a bigger club status have to weigh that view with the reality that we have and have moved up massively in terms of status and wealth during the Parish era.

People are always calling for the club to spend big on this or that player. Personally I feel the Stadium represents a real step forward both in status for the club and in inherent worth now that we actually own the thing.

It would be the Parish and co legacy and to an extent the Freedman legacy.

Personally I think it's the correct decision.

I agree 100%.
I am simply struggling with the idea that there is no important relationship between our on-field position and the building of the stand. It seems to me the two are fundamentally interlinked.

 

[Linford]

I agree 100%.
I am simply struggling with the idea that there is no important relationship between our on-field position and the building of the stand. It seems to me the two are fundamentally interlinked.

It can only help us!