Safe Standing Poll

[Acker79]

You lot really need to read up on this before posting such drivel. Of course there is a cost to removing existing seats but crowd capacity will increase due to the smaller seats that would be put in to comply with UEFA and for concerts etc. So ticket prices will be reduced especially in the long run. Don't forget the existing seats are wider and padded for our comfort you would not need this for other gigs etc.

Isn't the point of safestanding that they also work as seats for when all seater is needed? Making the seats narrower and less comfortable seems to go against the attitude of the club wanting to improve the match going experience. The comfort of seats is something of which the club are proud, they are not about to stick us all with 18 inch wide planks of wood.

Also, I did some reading, as you suggested,

These are the fifa requirements for stadium safety and security.

http://www.ffu.org.ua/files/ndocs_443.pdf (skip to page 36 of the document/(38 of the pdf))

It says you need to look at:

a -The number of seats you can fit in minus those that can't be used for whatever reason (restricted view, damaged, used for segregation, etc.)
b-the number of people you can get in per hour
c-the number of people that can exit the stadium in a reasonable time no greater than 10 minutes
d-how quickly the stadium can be emptied

And the lowest of these figures is your maximum capacity.

Add all the seats you want, it won't matter if any of the others are lower.

 

[Bombadier Botty]

This ship has sailed, the whole point of standing in my opinion was what came with it in the north stand in the 70s and the sense of freedom an rebellion that came with it, I don't want to stand in a little yellow painted area limited to one person

This. For me rail seating isn't what standing was all about, it's too sanitised. The days of open terraces have gone and with them went the true essence of standing at football.

 

[atomised]

Every time this comes up its been made clear that the capacity won't increase therefore the cost won't decrease. The stands are designed for seats not terracing and will stay that way.

 

[DumLum]

Everytime I have to watch Justin's house I wish we had safe standing in the North Stand.

 

[drew]

You lot really need to read up on this before posting such drivel. Of course there is a cost to removing existing seats but crowd capacity will increase due to the smaller seats that would be put in to comply with UEFA and for concerts etc. So ticket prices will be reduced especially in the long run. Don't forget the existing seats are wider and padded for our comfort you would not need this for other gigs etc.

Seems it is you that didn't read up about it.

 

[Birdie Boy]

In what way? http://www.safestandingroadshow.co.uk/the-proposal/the-proposal-continued---the-sums

 

[Acker79]

In what way? http://www.safestandingroadshow.co.uk/the-proposal/the-proposal-continued---the-sums

The problem is that that is a site with an agenda - to promote safe standing. It has made a purely hypothetical calculation that ignores the reality of ground regulations as that makes their argument more convincing, but it is not something that would work in real life where there are other regulation than 'the green guide' to consider.

They have also seemingly arbitrarily decided on how much money can be made on food and drink ignoring the different deals (i.e. whether the club get a cut of food and drink sales or a set amount etc).


If you're going to come in blustering that people "need to read up on this before posting such drivel" you need to make sure you are in possession of the full facts, not just one side's biased view.

 

[Birdie Boy]

Just because I posted one site, it doesn't mean I haven't read others..

With regard food and drink, if there is a rise in capacity then it will follow that there will be a rise in food and drink whether the club or caters get it is irrelevant. Surely, if the seats in the north stand were replaced with standing, it would most likely result in an increase in capacity as the current seats are wider than what may be required for standing.

Thing is, current laws forbid standing and I am not convinced it well change anyway.

My apologies for my obtuse reply yesterday, I had had a few beers.

 

[Acker79]

Just because I posted one site, it doesn't mean I haven't read others..

With regard food and drink, if there is a rise in capacity then it will follow that there will be a rise in food and drink whether the club or caters get it is irrelevant. Surely, if the seats in the north stand were replaced with standing, it would most likely result in an increase in capacity as the current seats are wider than what may be required for standing.

Thing is, current laws forbid standing and I am not convinced it well change anyway.

My apologies for my obtuse reply yesterday, I had had a few beers.��

It might result in an increased number of seats, but it won't lead to an increase in the number of people allowed in. As mentioned in previous posts, ground regulations (and the standing thing is a regulation of some sort (not sure if it's ground regulation, FA or whatever), not a law) dictate that the maximum number of people you can let into the stadium is the lowest number out of

a-the number of seats you can fit in minus those that can't be used for whatever reason (restricted view, damaged, used for segregation, etc.)
b-the number of people you can get in per hour
c-the number of people that can exit the stadium in a reasonable time no greater than 10 minutes
d-the number of people that can be fit in while allowing the stadium to be quickly emptied and fans moved to safety in an emergency

Paul Barber has said that the club would not be able to sell more tickets than they currently do because of these restrictions (I believe he has mentioned the number and size of exits as stumbling block). I don't know if that is just an excuse, but I'm inclined to believe him on this as I don't see why the club would not fit more seats in and up their revenue if the other limits allowed them to.


Yes, there will be an increase in food sales, but there was no explanation for where they got their figure from. I don't know how the catering contract is structured. We might be locked into a certain amount regardless of sales, so we wouldn't make more money on that until contract renewal time. But that is a moot point if the increased number of seats doesn't change the number or people you are allowed to let in as there won't be any significant change to catering income (there will probably be the odd fan who spends money saved on ticket on another pint or pie).

 

[drew]

One thing I haven't seen discussed is where are these extra fans going to come from. People talk about increased capacity and, ergo, increased sales in the concourses. However, what is to say that the increase in capacity in a standing section isn't matched by a reduction in the seating areas elsewhere in the stadium and, ergo, a reduction in the food and drink sales in those areas. The increase in one area has to exceed the loses in another to even begin to make it viable. The other question that follows is are there really football fans out there who currently don't go to football purely because they can't stand (not because of price) and are there enough of them to make a difference?

 

[atomised]

Paul Barber has said repeatedly that in the case of the amex safe standing would not result in increased capacity anyway so assuming that's correct the initial outlay on the work to change the seating would have to be paid for from somewhere hence price decrease being unlikely

 

[DavePage]

Are you talking about safe standing throughout the stadium, in one stand only, or in part of one stand only? And which stand or stands do you have in mind? And what about visiting supporters?

could stand outside the ground at a reduced cost, that works

 

[El Presidente]

When I go to a concert to see one of my favourite 'happening' bands (Level 42, Johnny Hates Jazz, Katrina & the Waves etc.) I usually elect to buy a standing ticket. These don't tend to be cheaper than seats (some seats with excellent views are more expensive than others, in a similar way to most sports stadia). I therefore don't expect the costs of the safe standing areas to be cheaper than those of the seats they replaced (where I tend to stand anyway).

The costs of replacing the current seats with rail seats is relatively insignificant. Think about the number of venues for concerts where seats and standing areas are changed many times during the year based on the nature of the performance. You don't hear venue promoters and owners ever saying that those watching gigs have to pay more/less to pay for the movement of the seats. So the cost issue is a red herring.

For many clubs in the Premier League, matchday income is only around 10% of total revenues. There is no need to increase ticket prices to accommodate more flexible seating/standing arrangements.

The wider issue is that with the average age of someone attending a match now being 41 (when I started watching the Albion in the 70's in the North Stand it was probably about 17), there are different expectations and demands from these fans. Younger fans have been priced out of the game, and that has led to the sanitisation of the atmosphere.

 

[Marty___Mcfly]

Given that most of the North Stand is standing already, introducing some formal safety measures to accommodate this seems logical and uncontroversial. The alternative the club appears to follow is to allow standing (informally) but to not actively seek to install safe standing measures.

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

Voted No..

As in "No, not particularly" rather than "No, absolutely not!"

 

[Randsta]

I stand anyway .....

 

[8ace]

Not according to Paul Barber, the capacity at the Amex cannot increase as the gangways, exits, etc are at the max. So even if we could get more seats in (won't happen) the stadium infrastructure would not be changed so no more seats can be supported. You will get the same room per person as now just a rail seat that can be locked shut.

This.

 

[AlbionPics&SouthCoastTwit]

This poll(e) was better off not standing.



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ng-snooze-outside-licence-car-parks-HEAD.html



Mr Sawickio was taken to hospital where he was kept overnight for observation. He later said: 'Perhaps it is my guardian angel telling me to slow down on the hard stuff.'

 

[drew]

This poll(e) was better off not standing.



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ng-snooze-outside-licence-car-parks-HEAD.html



Mr Sawickio was taken to hospital where he was kept overnight for observation. He later said: 'Perhaps it is my guardian angel telling me to slow down on the hard stuff.'

That's just speculation. He might have been standing right behind the car and got completely run over!