[Albion] Palace Fans Biggest Fear

[Horses Arse]

It’s quite funny that BHA built the Amex (cap. circa 32,000) for around £100m, whilst CPFC will spend £150m on adding just 7,500 to their capacity.

The business case for that new stand must be similar to that of HS2.

Astonishing!

 

[Skuller]

Had a quick look at the Albion's Corporate offering/prices and pulled together an estimate of what they could achieve

	Cat A	Cat B	Cat C	Cat D
Mullery's	£425.00​	£355.00​	£255.00​	£235.00​
Goldstone, Bruno's HBs	£355.00​	£300.00​	£225.00​	£200.00​
Heineken Experience	£275.00​	£235.00​	£180.00​	£165.00​
Standard Ticket	£50.00​	£40.00​	£30.00​	£20.00​

Estimating a third of the capacity could be corporate and the rest of the tickets would average out at standard matchday average:

		Cat A	Cat B	Cat C	Cat D
	Seats/Games​	2	4	7	6
Tier 1 Hospitality​	500​	£425,000	£710,000	£892,500	£705,000
Tier 2 Hospitality​	1000​	£710,000	£1,200,000	£1,575,000	£1,200,000
Tier 3 Hospitality​	1000​	£550,000	£940,000	£1,260,000	£990,000
Standard Tickets​	5000​	£500,000	£800,000	£1,050,000	£600,000
					£14,107,500.00

So to hit their £30 million target, they would need to make it all corporate or charge significantly more than we do.

Which would mean restaurant capacity for 7500 all eating at the same time……

 

[Van Cleef]

It is Beaky's vanity project so cost does not matter. If he somehow pulls it off using other people's money whilst paying himself handsomely as CEO, I would have to say 'nice one' to the prat.

I, for one, am watching all this with great interest.
We all know you can't polish a turd.
We all know you can roll a turd in glitter. But can you polish a quarter of a turd?
It's time to unfence that cash and let's find out once and for all.

 

[Uh_huh_him]

Which would mean restaurant capacity for 7500 all eating at the same time……

Well quite.

We already offer this option and our matchday revenue, per available ticket, isn't significantly different to Palace's.
Which suggests the number of people using these options is in the low hundreds, not the thousands necessary to significantly move the dial.

I suspect the increased capacity will have a maximum of £10m increased revenue per season.
so after 15 seasons it will have paid for itself and Palace can start being "competitive" with their extra quarter of a signing per season.

 

[Horses Arse]

Well quite.

We already offer this option and our matchday revenue, per available ticket, isn't significantly different to Palace's.
Which suggests the number of people using these options is in the low hundreds, not the thousands necessary to significantly move the dial.

I suspect the increased capacity will have a maximum of £10m increased revenue per season.
so after 15 seasons it will have paid for itself and Palace can start being "competitive" with their extra quarter of a signing per season.

Whilst all this is true it does contradict what Arsenal, Spurs, Man City have done, all in the name of increasing revenue. Or is that just brand growth? Greater attendances help that and the global recognition and sponsorhip flows from that. Brighton not in that league, palace way off - all they have is a glittery name.

I do also recognise though that for all the poking at palace over what looks like a vanity project, we have previously hammered them for spunking all the PL money on highly salaried average players - if this does happen it is positive for them in 'ring fencing' the future of the club, and positive for us in that their sole strategy for survival will be impacted by the incresing costs of ground redevelopment.

One other thing for beaky to consider and plan for - what seats ar the ultras going to demand? If they are in the corporate areas that will impact the revenue - or will he grow a pair and lessen their control of the club when the ground is only 2/3rds toilet? Interesting times.

 

[chaileyjem]

The thing that strikes me about the stand is that - at best - it won't open until 2027/28.
Nearly 10 years after it first had planning permission.

Albion had final planning permission for Falmer in Sept 2007. The stadium opened 4 years later.

 

[nickbrighton]

I think we have to remeber that this isnt just a revenue making scheme, it is finally an attempt to modernise the ground . Even if it is just one stand. We have all been saying what a dump the stadium de clad is for years, and its 100 years old. Sometimes you just have to bite the bullet and say I know I wont recoup the cost but we either spend or it just falls down (Old Trafford).

There doesnt seem any realistic way to recover the costs of 150 million (possibly more) plus whatever interest will be charged- I cant see anyone stumping up150 Million without expecting a return, over any meaningfull time span. This will be a drain on their resouces for decades I think

 

[Dougie]

A lot of bitterness on here. We’re getting a new ,long overdue, main stand and it will move us on as a club. All good in my eyes .

 

[Titanic]

A lot of bitterness on here. We’re getting a new ,long overdue, main stand and it will move us on as a club. All good in my eyes .

You mistake mild amusement for bitterness

"We've been to Marseille, your Ultras are shit"

 

[A mex eyecan]

A lot of bitterness on here. We’re getting a new ,long overdue, main stand and it will move us on as a club. All good in my eyes .

Bitterness? nah not at all fella. Even once you’ve got it done (or rather If you ever get it done) you will still be so far behind we will still titter along.

 

[Mellor 3 Ward 4]

A lot of bitterness on here. We’re getting a new ,long overdue, main stand and it will move us on as a club. All good in my eyes .

No bitterness - why would we be bitter? BHA are SO FAR ahead of Palance in every way - Stadium, training ground, league position, womens team, European trips, player recruitment....

How about sorting out the AW stand first - can't see half the pitch - the toilets are not fit for purpose - it's a disgrace - but as long as Parish gets his massize salary he doesn't give a sh*t abouut the fans apart from the AUs who he gave prime seats to in the Holmsdale at the expense of long standing STHs.

 

[Uh_huh_him]

Whilst all this is true it does contradict what Arsenal, Spurs, Man City have done, all in the name of increasing revenue. Or is that just brand growth? Greater attendances help that and the global recognition and sponsorhip flows from that. Brighton not in that league, palace way off - all they have is a glittery name.

I do also recognise though that for all the poking at palace over what looks like a vanity project, we have previously hammered them for spunking all the PL money on highly salaried average players - if this does happen it is positive for them in 'ring fencing' the future of the club, and positive for us in that their sole strategy for survival will be impacted by the incresing costs of ground redevelopment.

One other thing for beaky to consider and plan for - what seats ar the ultras going to demand? If they are in the corporate areas that will impact the revenue - or will he grow a pair and lessen their control of the club when the ground is only 2/3rds toilet? Interesting times.

Nothing wrong with improving the ground. They absolutely should be doing that.
The issue I have is Parish stating that this is required to make them competitive in the league.

Arsenal famously became much less competitive because they prioritised paying off their new ground.
Similar arguments were levelled at Spurs.

For both these teams building a new stadium was a long term vision of where they needed to be to keep up with United and Liverpool.
They had the revenue to be competitive in the transfer market, but needed the extra edge to keep them at the very top and FFP compliant.
Spurs in particular have maximised their potential by building a venue that can be used for other events outside of the football season.

Palace on the other hand, are fishing in a different pond, they are struggling to be competitive in the transfer market as it is.
Spending £150m to increase revenue by a maximum of £10m per season doesn't fix that.
Adding one decent stand, won't turn Selhurst into a multi-use stadium either.

 

[Uh_huh_him]

A lot of bitterness on here. We’re getting a new ,long overdue, main stand and it will move us on as a club. All good in my eyes .

How will it move you on, as a club?
It seems the biggest issue is not having enough funds to build a deep squad.

Wouldn't £150m spent on players capable of bringing you European football, generate more revenue?

 

[juliant]

A lot of bitterness on here. We’re getting a new ,long overdue, main stand and it will move us on as a club. All good in my eyes .

You haven't moved on in years this wont make any difference except drain your (ring fenced) funds. Lovely stuff !

 

[loz]

I think we have to remeber that this isnt just a revenue making scheme, it is finally an attempt to modernise the ground . Even if it is just one stand. We have all been saying what a dump the stadium de clad is for years, and its 100 years old. Sometimes you just have to bite the bullet and say I know I wont recoup the cost but we either spend or it just falls down (Old Trafford).

There doesnt seem any realistic way to recover the costs of 150 million (possibly more) plus whatever interest will be charged- I cant see anyone stumping up150 Million without expecting a return, over any meaningfull time span. This will be a drain on their resouces for decades I think

Yes you are correct, it needs doing. And yes it will be a drain on resources but that maybe the reason the new academy took priority ?

Changing the subject a bit but went to old Trafford a couple of weeks ago the first time in 10+ years and was shocked by the state of it, like the old Wembley “ all fur coat and no knickers”

 

[nickbrighton]

Yes you are correct, it needs doing. And yes it will be a drain on resources but that maybe the reason the new academy took priority ?

Changing the subject a bit but went to old Trafford a couple of weeks ago the first time in 10+ years and was shocked by the state of it, like the old Wembley “ all fur coat and no knickers”

I think its a very positive step for Palace, and much over due. Its a hard choice but150 million for one stand seems a huge amount of money- when the rest of the ground is in dire need. I wonder if spending say 50 million on the rest of the ground, and 100 million on the stand would be better value- £100 million should still get a great stand, and the improvements to the rest would be quite substantial. hard choice, is there a longer term plan to redo other stands in due course?

Old Trafford seems to be suffering a similar decline to most old grounds- vast sums required to just stand still, . Palace at least have recognised that rebuild is a better plan than the effecctive managed decline that is happening in so many grounds.

 

[The Colonel]

The new stand looks nice and is something they need to do, but what about the other three sides? The size and scale of the new stand seems to box in the rest of the site, leaving no further room for expansion. If I was them, I'd probably aim to fix more than one side with the funds.

 

[Peppermint Tea]

A lot of bitterness on here. We’re getting a new ,long overdue, main stand and it will move us on as a club. All good in my eyes .

I have only just realised that this is a parody account...fair play, Dougie, you had me - I thought you were a genuine Palace fan. Now I can see and enjoy the sophisticated wit of your posts because they are - impressively - beyond parody.

 

[eaglesdan]

We are a bit limited in what we can do expansion wise. The Whitehorse stand is blocked by the supermarket, although that may move back a bit when the club shop and ticket office move into the main stand. The Arthur cannot go any higher due to planning restrictions and line of sight for the houses in park road. I do agree that facilities in the Arthur are poor, and cramped, but I would argue no worse than for example the away stand at Villa

 

[Mellor 3 Ward 4]

We are a bit limited in what we can do expansion wise. The Whitehorse stand is blocked by the supermarket, although that may move back a bit when the club shop and ticket office move into the main stand. The Arthur cannot go any higher due to planning restrictions and line of sight for the houses in park road. I do agree that facilities in the Arthur are poor, and cramped, but I would argue no worse than for example the away stand at Villa

Yep, away at Villa the facilities are poor - concourses are cramped and facilities awful - and it's got games for EURO 28 too - not sure how. View's OK though TBF and I guess EUROs need a stadium in the midlands.

I know they're (planning) on redoing one stand - behind the goal which to me looks OK.

I guess that (like Palace) there's a road directly behind the away stand so it gets complicated....

Anyway, I'm giving Palace away a miss this year as fed up with being treated like an animal (same for your lot at The Amex I guess.) Two years ago (Maupay) we were all let out at the same time - no real trouble, yet last year (Sanchez) OB kept us in and herded us to somewhere we didn't want to go to.....