Safe standing

[Return of the Rev]

I doubt it, the people who are in the £42 seats are probably not the ones interested in standing. It was you who said the club wouldn't allow cheaper tickets to be sold for standing if they have more expensive seats still to sell. Usually pay £25 in the North, so maybe £20 for standing if they get 1.5/1 or 2/1, otherwise same price I guess

So you can only stand up if you sit in the inferior seats

 

[Superphil]

The capacity in the North Stand (and the rest of the stadium) is limited by the club's licence to operate by Brighton & Hove City Council. At present, the stadium's capacity is 30,750.

Although the club can apply for a change in capacity, they'd have to make a good case as to why and how. Assuming we're talking about 3,000 North Stand seats being replaced on a 1.5/1 or a 2/1 basis (an increase in capacity of 1,500 or 3,000), as Paul Barber has stated, the egress areas and vomitories aren't big enough to cope with such an increase.

And although he stated he wanted the 'fan experience' to be as good as it could be (or words to that effect) you shouldn't forget that a business case has to be made for the change from the 'all-seater' area to the 'safe-standing' area. I can see the club going for a 1/1 replacement basis, but if the 1.5/1 or 2/1 change is prohibitively expensive, I'd seriously doubt it happening.

IIRC barber explicitly said that any move for safe standing at the Amex would not mean cheaper tickets or increased capacity.

 

[crookie]

IIRC barber explicitly said that any move for safe standing at the Amex would not mean cheaper tickets or increased capacity.

Surely that would be total capacity. Obviously there are congestion issues in the North concourse, but if they could be overcome, the seats set aside for segregation in the South could be added to the total available capacity for standing ?

 

[GT49er]

Do you know anything about the Bradford fire? Exactly what fences exacerbated the problem?

I had always assumed that there were fences at Bradford. Well, there were actually - but not in front of that particular stand, which is something I didn't know until I looked it up just now. It was still a case for which the standard mantra of 'all-seater stadiums everywhere - no standing' wasn't the answer.

 

[The Albion Roar]

IIRC barber explicitly said that any move for safe standing at the Amex would not mean cheaper tickets or increased capacity.

I'm talking about the cost of installation, not ticket prices.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

IIRC barber explicitly said that any move for safe standing at the Amex would not mean cheaper tickets or increased capacity.

Doesn't the definition of 'safe standing ' imply no change in capacity ? These are still individual spaces of the same capacity as a seat where the seat can be used (for e.g. European games) or not.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Could it be flexible then depending on how many tickets we have sold, so the total capacity doesn't go over the limit. For example, if the North could hold 6000 standing against 3000 seated, and we have only sold 25000 tickets, could we then have a whole 6000 in the North, or is there an upper limit for Health and Safety reasons in each particular stand ?

Safe standing as it is being proposed, at the moment, is 1 for 1.

 

[crookie]

Safe standing as it is being proposed, at the moment, is 1 for 1.

View attachment 78496

Not quite the North Stand at the Goldstone, but OK, I'm not 18 anymore !!

 

[ewe2]

.....But if you had narrower seats,then you could get more in,assuming the exits,stairwells etc have some tolerance,maybe say an 10 %extra ,this could be the extra revenue that makes it all work.

 

[Superphil]

Doesn't the definition of 'safe standing ' imply no change in capacity ? These are still individual spaces of the same capacity as a seat where the seat can be used (for e.g. European games) or not.

In Germany that doesn't seem to be the case but barber said it would be IF the Albion did it at the Amex. It's on his interview on the official site.

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

Safe standing as it is being proposed, at the moment, is 1 for 1.

View attachment 78496

Wannabe porn stars
regards
DR

 

[drew]

So you can only stand up if you sit in the inferior seats

You're being deliberately obtuse. The people who are likely to be interested in standing are likely to be those that like the atmosphere and they are likely to be those in North stand (many of whom already stand). Let's be honest, those that legally stood to watch the Albion play (at home) did so 17 years ago, ergo they are 17 years older. Personally, I don't think they should reduce the price just because some chose to stand bearing in mind the cost the club will incur in accommodating that preference! If the capacity was increased then by charging the same they'll pay off the increased cost sooner!

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

In Germany that doesn't seem to be the case but barber said it would be IF the Albion did it at the Amex. It's on his interview on the official site.

Just read up on it and it is the 'rail seat' option. I would imagine that would be the only type of safe standing that has a chance of getting a safety certificate in this country. It's really not that different from people standing in front of their seats but at least it would allow the stewards to stop the current pretence of getting everyone to sit. Those that want to stand go in the North. Those that want to sit go elsewhere and everyone is happy.

 

[Return of the Rev]

You're being deliberately obtuse. The people who are likely to be interested in standing are likely to be those that like the atmosphere and they are likely to be those in North stand (many of whom already stand). Let's be honest, those that legally stood to watch the Albion play (at home) did so 17 years ago, ergo they are 17 years older. Personally, I don't think they should reduce the price just because some chose to stand bearing in mind the cost the club will incur in accommodating that preference! If the capacity was increased then by charging the same they'll pay off the increased cost sooner!

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?...D07825E2A41E284B5FE6D07825E2A41E2&FORM=VRDGAR

 

[BeHereNow]

Slightly off topic, but if the North Stand was doubled in size, this is what it might look like...but in colour.

 

[Superphil]

Just read up on it and it is the 'rail seat' option. I would imagine that would be the only type of safe standing that has a chance of getting a safety certificate in this country. It's really not that different from people standing in front of their seats but at least it would allow the stewards to stop the current pretence of getting everyone to sit. Those that want to stand go in the North. Those that want to sit go elsewhere and everyone is happy.

Will there be a safe standing area in the 1901 Club

 

[Aveacarlin']

1 for 2 would be amazing and would allow the North to hold about 6,000. How many did the old North Stand hold? At the moment we haven't got the fans to fill it.

Seems Paul Barber doesn't want to go down the 1 for 2 route because we would have to increase the size of the for vormitoires and exits. Didn't ruled it out though.

1 for 2! Can you imagine the perpetual moaners on here who whinge about the catering week in, week out if 1 for 2 was introduced?

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

 

[DarrenFreemansPerm]

View attachment 78497

Slightly off topic, but if the North Stand was doubled in size, this is what it might look like...but in colour.

Shame, that's how it should look

 

[sllugaes]

Shame, that's how it should look

Yep agree, and not like a subbuteo stand. Maybe one day!

Sent from my G7-L01 using Tapatalk

 

[ewe2]

I guess most fans that like standing,are already standing.IMO the safe standing has to be cheaper for take-up. IS the north stand full to capacity every match at the moment ?