How can the stadium be on the far side of the O2 seeing as the O2 is already on the end of the peninsula? Surely it would be on the near side closer to the Blackwall tunnel?
Anyway we're 15 years late, really we should have taken the Millennium Stadium when they first planned it and turned it into one of the most iconic stadiums in the world, but we had just invested in The Valley so we didn't. Imagine those 12 pylons as the floodlights, the stands built underneath the canopy with enough room around the sides for all the entertainment complexes you would need.
Ho hum
You are right on your first point,pretty much anyway. The O2 is to the north of the station, the new stadium would be to the west of it. So probably walking distance from Charlton station or more likely Westcombe Park would be much the same as for the O2.
I guess your second point is a wind up. There is no way Charlton Athletic Football Club could be permanently located north of the river Thames in an area most of us have little connection with.
I know you're based in Prague now mate, but the O2 Arena is most definitely SOUTH of the river, and therefore is no wind up at all. Not only would the conversion have been cheaper than a brand new stadium, but the council and the government would have paid for most of it to stop it becoming a white elephant site, similar to the incentives and cuts West Ham have been given for the Olympic Site.
But as I said, 15 years too late
My apologies. I thought you were talking about the Olympic Stadium. You were referring to the Dome. Sorry.
I can see three sports teams being interested in using a spanking new stadium. An NFL franchise, a rugby club and Charlton.
Any two of those three signing up to be tenants could justify the outlay for a pretty tidy stadium.
I can see that argument.
But then NYA talks about atmosphere as a reason to move. Would such a stadium have atmosphere? Would we feel at home?
I went to the Allianz in May and TSV, Munich's second team, were at home that day. Even though there are clever things the Allianz can do to convert itself to look like TSV rather than Bayern at home that day, I wasnt convinced. Lovely stadium. Atmosphere? Noise yes, even with only 18,000. But something a bit plastic and transient about it. I have not been to the other big German grounds but people tend to talk about Schalke, Dortmund and Hamburg as the places with atmosphere. And those grounds are not shared.
I can see three sports teams being interested in using a spanking new stadium. An NFL franchise, a rugby club and Charlton.
Any two of those three signing up to be tenants could justify the outlay for a pretty tidy stadium.
I can see that argument.
But then NYA talks about atmosphere as a reason to move. Would such a stadium have atmosphere? Would we feel at home?
I went to the Allianz in May and TSV, Munich's second team, were at home that day. Even though there are clever things the Allianz can do to convert itself to look like TSV rather than Bayern at home that day, I wasnt convinced. Lovely stadium. Atmosphere? Noise yes, even with only 18,000. But something a bit plastic and transient about it. I have not been to the other big German grounds but people tend to talk about Schalke, Dortmund and Hamburg as the places with atmosphere. And those grounds are not shared.
All arguments that effect and are important to fans. In the big scheme of things how much value do you think money men put on something as subjective as atmosphere ? Certainly not enough to get in the way of a profit.
I don't really care what the business case may be, I don't want to move.
It would take one hell of a case to convince me otherwise, and all this bullshit about being able to walk there from Charlton Station is a complete read herring. You can walk just about anywhere if you had the time.
I can see three sports teams being interested in using a spanking new stadium. An NFL franchise, a rugby club and Charlton.
Any two of those three signing up to be tenants could justify the outlay for a pretty tidy stadium.
I can see that argument.
But then NYA talks about atmosphere as a reason to move. Would such a stadium have atmosphere? Would we feel at home?
I went to the Allianz in May and TSV, Munich's second team, were at home that day. Even though there are clever things the Allianz can do to convert itself to look like TSV rather than Bayern at home that day, I wasnt convinced. Lovely stadium. Atmosphere? Noise yes, even with only 18,000. But something a bit plastic and transient about it. I have not been to the other big German grounds but people tend to talk about Schalke, Dortmund and Hamburg as the places with atmosphere. And those grounds are not shared.
All arguments that effect and are important to fans. In the big scheme of things how much value do you think money men put on something as subjective as atmosphere ? Certainly not enough to get in the way of a profit.
I was thinking more of a 20-25,000 stadium that would be intelligently designed hopefully (for acoustics) and generally full, rather than CAFC as the junior tenant (to an NFL franchise) in a much larger stadium.
I don't really care what the business case may be, I don't want to move.
It would take one hell of a case to convince me otherwise, and all this bullshit about being able to walk there from Charlton Station is a complete read herring. You can walk just about anywhere if you had the time.
Quite. For the record, Google Maps has it roughly half hour from Charlton station, 20 minutes from Westcombe Park. Public transport already runs nearby from both of course.
If the Heygate in Elephant + Castle is anything to go by, the Council will be looking for private partners who would rapidly dilute any social housing. MS + TJ will be interested in private housing as that will generate the main return. Lets face it thats what they appear to be most interested in above everything.
Given the MS statement that the club is not for sale for 40 million, which is immediately disproved; and the lack of general communication from the beginning. I am not sure that I would trust MS / TJ to take on any large scale development of the stadium.
Trustworthy new owners who engage properly with supporters may have a chance. TJ and MS appear to have lost the confidence of Charlton supporters.
I wouldn't put atmosphere in a 'business case' discussion. I'd lump in with the 'emotional case' arguments such as SE7 is our home / people don't like change / fresh start for the club / etc.
However, if Charlton were interested in becoming one of the co-tenants then I'd see getting the atmosphere 'right' as a potential problem yes, but a problem with solutions as long as we are involved from the start.
The NFL franchise is the interesting point here. The NFL have stated they want to have a London franchise and this would need to be at least a 50k stadium. I would assume it would have a retractable field which could allow for the NFL team to play on AstroTurf. Playing on grass would not be practicable for both teams due to the wear and tear.
If this was the case then charlton would not be the main tenant.
Now the spoiler here is the team likely to move would be Jacksonville (if no new team is created) the owner of Jacksonville now owns Fulham so it wouldn't surprise me if this has not already been discussed for them.
I can see three sports teams being interested in using a spanking new stadium. An NFL franchise, a rugby club and Charlton.
Any two of those three signing up to be tenants could justify the outlay for a pretty tidy stadium.
I can see that argument.
But then NYA talks about atmosphere as a reason to move. Would such a stadium have atmosphere? Would we feel at home?
I went to the Allianz in May and TSV, Munich's second team, were at home that day. Even though there are clever things the Allianz can do to convert itself to look like TSV rather than Bayern at home that day, I wasnt convinced. Lovely stadium. Atmosphere? Noise yes, even with only 18,000. But something a bit plastic and transient about it. I have not been to the other big German grounds but people tend to talk about Schalke, Dortmund and Hamburg as the places with atmosphere. And those grounds are not shared.
All arguments that effect and are important to fans. In the big scheme of things how much value do you think money men put on something as subjective as atmosphere ? Certainly not enough to get in the way of a profit.
I was thinking more of a 20-25,000 stadium that would be intelligently designed hopefully (for acoustics) and generally full, rather than CAFC as the junior tenant (to an NFL franchise) in a much larger stadium.
Ok, but why do you also assert (earlier) that the Makro site is a non-starter for such a stadium?
I can see three sports teams being interested in using a spanking new stadium. An NFL franchise, a rugby club and Charlton.
Any two of those three signing up to be tenants could justify the outlay for a pretty tidy stadium.
I can see that argument.
But then NYA talks about atmosphere as a reason to move. Would such a stadium have atmosphere? Would we feel at home?
I went to the Allianz in May and TSV, Munich's second team, were at home that day. Even though there are clever things the Allianz can do to convert itself to look like TSV rather than Bayern at home that day, I wasnt convinced. Lovely stadium. Atmosphere? Noise yes, even with only 18,000. But something a bit plastic and transient about it. I have not been to the other big German grounds but people tend to talk about Schalke, Dortmund and Hamburg as the places with atmosphere. And those grounds are not shared.
All arguments that effect and are important to fans. In the big scheme of things how much value do you think money men put on something as subjective as atmosphere ? Certainly not enough to get in the way of a profit.
I was thinking more of a 20-25,000 stadium that would be intelligently designed hopefully (for acoustics) and generally full, rather than CAFC as the junior tenant (to an NFL franchise) in a much larger stadium.
Ok, but why do you also assert (earlier) that the Makro site is a non-starter for such a stadium?
Just my take on things but that area seems to be very much a commercial enterprise area with superstores, supermarkets etc. not attractive to investors looking at a development on the lines of my spoof adverteisment earlier in the thread. Don't think the £ stacks up with a multi use stadium which needs very good transport links to the rest of the country which moving a bit further onto the peninsula provides in buckets.
I can see three sports teams being interested in using a spanking new stadium. An NFL franchise, a rugby club and Charlton.
Any two of those three signing up to be tenants could justify the outlay for a pretty tidy stadium.
I can see that argument.
But then NYA talks about atmosphere as a reason to move. Would such a stadium have atmosphere? Would we feel at home?
I went to the Allianz in May and TSV, Munich's second team, were at home that day. Even though there are clever things the Allianz can do to convert itself to look like TSV rather than Bayern at home that day, I wasnt convinced. Lovely stadium. Atmosphere? Noise yes, even with only 18,000. But something a bit plastic and transient about it. I have not been to the other big German grounds but people tend to talk about Schalke, Dortmund and Hamburg as the places with atmosphere. And those grounds are not shared.
All arguments that effect and are important to fans. In the big scheme of things how much value do you think money men put on something as subjective as atmosphere ? Certainly not enough to get in the way of a profit.
I was thinking more of a 20-25,000 stadium that would be intelligently designed hopefully (for acoustics) and generally full, rather than CAFC as the junior tenant (to an NFL franchise) in a much larger stadium.
Ok, but why do you also assert (earlier) that the Makro site is a non-starter for such a stadium?
What would be the point? My argument is that the Peninsula is on the tube with the facilities of the O2 next door (to further incentivise people to come and make a nice day of it).
The main consideration for me regarding the peninsula is a defensive one and that is the reason it wasn't closed down by the previous management. What if another London Premier League club moved there? What if we were left playing Orient (all right not quite Orient, say QPR) to someone else's West Ham (Chelsea). That's why Charlton needed to be in the loop.
Whether things have ever gone further than that is what we need to uncover. Or is it just bullshit for the purposes of enhancing the offer to a vendor? In which case I don't think the council will be too impressed.
The main consideration for me regarding the peninsula is a defensive one and that is the reason it wasn't closed down by the previous management. What if another London Premier League club moved there? What if we were left playing Orient (all right not quite Orient, say QPR) to someone else's West Ham (Chelsea). That's why Charlton needed to be in the loop.
Whether things have ever gone further than that is what we need to uncover. Or is it just bullshit for the purposes of enhancing the offer to a vendor? In which case I don't think the council will be too impressed.
Then in many respects West Ham getting the Olympic Stadium has resolved that problem hasn't it ? What other PL club would consider that location as acceptable. None is the answer I think.
I can see three sports teams being interested in using a spanking new stadium. An NFL franchise, a rugby club and Charlton.
Any two of those three signing up to be tenants could justify the outlay for a pretty tidy stadium.
I can see that argument.
But then NYA talks about atmosphere as a reason to move. Would such a stadium have atmosphere? Would we feel at home?
I went to the Allianz in May and TSV, Munich's second team, were at home that day. Even though there are clever things the Allianz can do to convert itself to look like TSV rather than Bayern at home that day, I wasnt convinced. Lovely stadium. Atmosphere? Noise yes, even with only 18,000. But something a bit plastic and transient about it. I have not been to the other big German grounds but people tend to talk about Schalke, Dortmund and Hamburg as the places with atmosphere. And those grounds are not shared.
All arguments that effect and are important to fans. In the big scheme of things how much value do you think money men put on something as subjective as atmosphere ? Certainly not enough to get in the way of a profit.
I was thinking more of a 20-25,000 stadium that would be intelligently designed hopefully (for acoustics) and generally full, rather than CAFC as the junior tenant (to an NFL franchise) in a much larger stadium.
Ok, but why do you also assert (earlier) that the Makro site is a non-starter for such a stadium?
What would be the point? My argument is that the Peninsula is on the tube with the facilities of the O2 next door (to further incentivise people to come and make a nice day of it).
But the Tube doesn't go to where most Charlton fans live.
On the surface I see your point about the facilities of the O2 next door. However I am worried that in fact its an assumption about how people want to spend their leisure time. I know that in the US the big clubs try to make a day of it, BBQs in the car park and all that, but its unwise to assume the core customer (sorry) of CAFC is up for all that. Maybe they are, maybe I'm a Luddite. My point is, a sound business case rests on that being proved through research before you go down that path.
What is for sure is that a family day at the O2 together with a Charlton game will be one expensive day out.
I can see three sports teams being interested in using a spanking new stadium. An NFL franchise, a rugby club and Charlton.
Any two of those three signing up to be tenants could justify the outlay for a pretty tidy stadium.
I can see that argument.
But then NYA talks about atmosphere as a reason to move. Would such a stadium have atmosphere? Would we feel at home?
I went to the Allianz in May and TSV, Munich's second team, were at home that day. Even though there are clever things the Allianz can do to convert itself to look like TSV rather than Bayern at home that day, I wasnt convinced. Lovely stadium. Atmosphere? Noise yes, even with only 18,000. But something a bit plastic and transient about it. I have not been to the other big German grounds but people tend to talk about Schalke, Dortmund and Hamburg as the places with atmosphere. And those grounds are not shared.
All arguments that effect and are important to fans. In the big scheme of things how much value do you think money men put on something as subjective as atmosphere ? Certainly not enough to get in the way of a profit.
I was thinking more of a 20-25,000 stadium that would be intelligently designed hopefully (for acoustics) and generally full, rather than CAFC as the junior tenant (to an NFL franchise) in a much larger stadium.
Ok, but why do you also assert (earlier) that the Makro site is a non-starter for such a stadium?
What would be the point? My argument is that the Peninsula is on the tube with the facilities of the O2 next door (to further incentivise people to come and make a nice day of it).
But the Tube doesn't go to where most Charlton fans live.
On the surface I see your point about the facilities of the O2 next door. However I am worried that in fact its an assumption about how people want to spend their leisure time. I know that in the US the big clubs try to make a day of it, BBQs in the car park and all that, but its unwise to assume the core customer (sorry) of CAFC is up for all that. Maybe they are, maybe I'm a Luddite. My point is, a sound business case rests on that being proved through research before you go down that path.
What is for sure is that a family day at the O2 together with a Charlton game will be one expensive day out.
My view is that the core fans will come anyhow (it's only a mile away after all), whilst we stand to gain new fans by virtue of how easy it will be to get there.
I can only speak for myself but I know that if I asked some friends (casual fans of football, especially those with kids) if they fancied a trip to a match with easy transport and nice options for lunch/drink beforehand, they'd be much more likely to agree. This would be particularly true also for business contacts/clients that one might invite on a casual basis not a posh hospitality basis.
Maybe a move would accompany an aggressive attempt to get east and south Kent fans. High speed to Stratford then tube to north Greenwich. Such a scheme maybe felt necessary to combat west ham doing the same.
I can see three sports teams being interested in using a spanking new stadium. An NFL franchise, a rugby club and Charlton.
Any two of those three signing up to be tenants could justify the outlay for a pretty tidy stadium.
I can see that argument.
But then NYA talks about atmosphere as a reason to move. Would such a stadium have atmosphere? Would we feel at home?
I went to the Allianz in May and TSV, Munich's second team, were at home that day. Even though there are clever things the Allianz can do to convert itself to look like TSV rather than Bayern at home that day, I wasnt convinced. Lovely stadium. Atmosphere? Noise yes, even with only 18,000. But something a bit plastic and transient about it. I have not been to the other big German grounds but people tend to talk about Schalke, Dortmund and Hamburg as the places with atmosphere. And those grounds are not shared.
All arguments that effect and are important to fans. In the big scheme of things how much value do you think money men put on something as subjective as atmosphere ? Certainly not enough to get in the way of a profit.
I was thinking more of a 20-25,000 stadium that would be intelligently designed hopefully (for acoustics) and generally full, rather than CAFC as the junior tenant (to an NFL franchise) in a much larger stadium.
Ok, but why do you also assert (earlier) that the Makro site is a non-starter for such a stadium?
What would be the point? My argument is that the Peninsula is on the tube with the facilities of the O2 next door (to further incentivise people to come and make a nice day of it).
But the Tube doesn't go to where most Charlton fans live.
On the surface I see your point about the facilities of the O2 next door. However I am worried that in fact its an assumption about how people want to spend their leisure time. I know that in the US the big clubs try to make a day of it, BBQs in the car park and all that, but its unwise to assume the core customer (sorry) of CAFC is up for all that. Maybe they are, maybe I'm a Luddite. My point is, a sound business case rests on that being proved through research before you go down that path.
What is for sure is that a family day at the O2 together with a Charlton game will be one expensive day out.
My view is that the core fans will come anyhow (it's only a mile away after all), whilst we stand to gain new fans by virtue of how easy it will be to get there.
I can only speak for myself but I know that if I asked some friends (casual fans of football, especially those with kids) if they fancied a trip to a match with easy transport and nice options for lunch/drink beforehand, they'd be much more likely to agree. This would be particularly true also for business contacts/clients that one might invite on a casual basis not a posh hospitality basis.
There is literally nothing around The Valley.
Fair points. But really important they are tested in research.
I am just really worried about your first sentence. It implies a complacency about customers that has brought down many a business. I know it seems like football fans put up with anything. But in fact a lot of outside commentators said something similar when we went to Selhurst. "It only seven miles..."
I tell you here that this is one "core fan" who won't come if we leave The Valley.
I am something of an anachronism on here I know so my view can be easily dismissed but I think there are plenty amongst the wider support who think like me.
From a developers point of view though surely Charlton would only be part of the equation. As a multi purpose multi sport ? venue it could attract a different type of sports fan rather than just the reluctant and dyed in the wool football fan. Generate a multi faceted revenue stream and get income on perhaps three or four days of the week and some evenings for concerts as well. The problems that Charlton fans would experience in terms of travel to the stadium would be offset by the ease that punters from all over London or indeed country would benefit from by being near North Greenwich. I would suggest our import is of little concern in the wider scheme of things.
I tell you here that this is one "core fan" who won't come if we leave The Valley.
I am something of an anachronism on here I know so my view can be easily dismissed but I think there are plenty amongst the wider support who think like me.
On the contrary Len, there are enough here who have said the same thing today already for any prudent business not to assume that the core fans will come anyway.
I'm with Len. It made " business sense" to move in '85 apparently. And it was only " one bus ride away". All that hard work and the emotional rollercoaster of a journey getting back to The Valley, and we're back on the subject of leaving again.
I tell you here that this is one "core fan" who won't come if we leave The Valley.
I am something of an anachronism on here I know so my view can be easily dismissed but I think there are plenty amongst the wider support who think like me.
Len, please stop playing the victim for once and actually READ what other people have said.
Maybe a move would accompany an aggressive attempt to get east and south Kent fans. High speed to Stratford then tube to north Greenwich. Such a scheme maybe felt necessary to combat west ham doing the same.
I use HS1 regularly and it's not cheap, even with a railcard. A return trip to the O2 from Ramsgate would be about £40 or £26 with a network card. The Thanet population is the poorest in Kent (although there are very affluent pockets) and wouldn't generally be in a position to spend £75-£100 on a trip to see Charlton. It's also 70 minutes (at present) from Ramsgate just to Stratford. We have served this market with Valley Express.
Well over half our support is in four SE London boroughs. Another chunk is in NW Kent (proper) and may find Ebbsfleet International convenient, but they'd find it just as easy to get to Arsenal if they can get in.
North Greenwich is about two miles walk from Charlton station. What it does have is a good bus service, but so does The Valley. How willing people are to queue and travel on buses if given no choice I don't know.
I'm with Len. It made " business sense" to move in '85 apparently. And it was only " one bus ride away". All that hard work and the emotional rollercoaster of a journey getting back to The Valley, and we're back on the subject of leaving again.
I can see three sports teams being interested in using a spanking new stadium. An NFL franchise, a rugby club and Charlton.
Any two of those three signing up to be tenants could justify the outlay for a pretty tidy stadium.
I can see that argument.
But then NYA talks about atmosphere as a reason to move. Would such a stadium have atmosphere? Would we feel at home?
I went to the Allianz in May and TSV, Munich's second team, were at home that day. Even though there are clever things the Allianz can do to convert itself to look like TSV rather than Bayern at home that day, I wasnt convinced. Lovely stadium. Atmosphere? Noise yes, even with only 18,000. But something a bit plastic and transient about it. I have not been to the other big German grounds but people tend to talk about Schalke, Dortmund and Hamburg as the places with atmosphere. And those grounds are not shared.
All arguments that effect and are important to fans. In the big scheme of things how much value do you think money men put on something as subjective as atmosphere ? Certainly not enough to get in the way of a profit.
I was thinking more of a 20-25,000 stadium that would be intelligently designed hopefully (for acoustics) and generally full, rather than CAFC as the junior tenant (to an NFL franchise) in a much larger stadium.
Ok, but why do you also assert (earlier) that the Makro site is a non-starter for such a stadium?
What would be the point? My argument is that the Peninsula is on the tube with the facilities of the O2 next door (to further incentivise people to come and make a nice day of it).
But the Tube doesn't go to where most Charlton fans live.
On the surface I see your point about the facilities of the O2 next door. However I am worried that in fact its an assumption about how people want to spend their leisure time. I know that in the US the big clubs try to make a day of it, BBQs in the car park and all that, but its unwise to assume the core customer (sorry) of CAFC is up for all that. Maybe they are, maybe I'm a Luddite. My point is, a sound business case rests on that being proved through research before you go down that path.
What is for sure is that a family day at the O2 together with a Charlton game will be one expensive day out.
My view is that the core fans will come anyhow (it's only a mile away after all), whilst we stand to gain new fans by virtue of how easy it will be to get there.
I can only speak for myself but I know that if I asked some friends (casual fans of football, especially those with kids) if they fancied a trip to a match with easy transport and nice options for lunch/drink beforehand, they'd be much more likely to agree. This would be particularly true also for business contacts/clients that one might invite on a casual basis not a posh hospitality basis.
There is literally nothing around The Valley.
I think you are right NYA. We have to decide where we want to be on the big map of football. The premier league is where it's at unfortunately and i'm sure,deep down,most of us want to be back there playing the best teams in the land.However it is a much different beast to the one we left.The money now involved is phenomenal and to be a part of it and more importantly to STAY a part of it I think things would have to change about the way we go about our business. The neutral/undecided fan that we would need to attract are currently spoilt for choice in a big city like ours.
Comments
But then NYA talks about atmosphere as a reason to move. Would such a stadium have atmosphere? Would we feel at home?
I went to the Allianz in May and TSV, Munich's second team, were at home that day. Even though there are clever things the Allianz can do to convert itself to look like TSV rather than Bayern at home that day, I wasnt convinced. Lovely stadium. Atmosphere? Noise yes, even with only 18,000. But something a bit plastic and transient about it. I have not been to the other big German grounds but people tend to talk about Schalke, Dortmund and Hamburg as the places with atmosphere. And those grounds are not shared.
It would take one hell of a case to convince me otherwise, and all this bullshit about being able to walk there from Charlton Station is a complete read herring. You can walk just about anywhere if you had the time.
Given the MS statement that the club is not for sale for 40 million, which is immediately disproved; and the lack of general communication from the beginning. I am not sure that I would trust MS / TJ to take on any large scale development of the stadium.
Trustworthy new owners who engage properly with supporters may have a chance. TJ and MS appear to have lost the confidence of Charlton supporters.
However, if Charlton were interested in becoming one of the co-tenants then I'd see getting the atmosphere 'right' as a potential problem yes, but a problem with solutions as long as we are involved from the start.
If this was the case then charlton would not be the main tenant.
Now the spoiler here is the team likely to move would be Jacksonville (if no new team is created) the owner of Jacksonville now owns Fulham so it wouldn't surprise me if this has not already been discussed for them.
Whether things have ever gone further than that is what we need to uncover. Or is it just bullshit for the purposes of enhancing the offer to a vendor? In which case I don't think the council will be too impressed.
On the surface I see your point about the facilities of the O2 next door. However I am worried that in fact its an assumption about how people want to spend their leisure time. I know that in the US the big clubs try to make a day of it, BBQs in the car park and all that, but its unwise to assume the core customer (sorry) of CAFC is up for all that. Maybe they are, maybe I'm a Luddite. My point is, a sound business case rests on that being proved through research before you go down that path.
What is for sure is that a family day at the O2 together with a Charlton game will be one expensive day out.
I can only speak for myself but I know that if I asked some friends (casual fans of football, especially those with kids) if they fancied a trip to a match with easy transport and nice options for lunch/drink beforehand, they'd be much more likely to agree. This would be particularly true also for business contacts/clients that one might invite on a casual basis not a posh hospitality basis.
There is literally nothing around The Valley.
I am just really worried about your first sentence. It implies a complacency about customers that has brought down many a business. I know it seems like football fans put up with anything. But in fact a lot of outside commentators said something similar when we went to Selhurst. "It only seven miles..."
I am something of an anachronism on here I know so my view can be easily dismissed but I think there are plenty amongst the wider support who think like me.
All that hard work and the emotional rollercoaster of a journey getting back to The Valley, and we're back on the subject of leaving again.
Well over half our support is in four SE London boroughs. Another chunk is in NW Kent (proper) and may find Ebbsfleet International convenient, but they'd find it just as easy to get to Arsenal if they can get in.
North Greenwich is about two miles walk from Charlton station. What it does have is a good bus service, but so does The Valley. How willing people are to queue and travel on buses if given no choice I don't know.