Purely in terms of business case I think a new stadium would mean more new supporters deciding to attend games than current supporters deciding to call it a day.
In the Championship last season, of the 12 clubs with the highest attendances, 6 had new purpose built stadia (Hull, Cardiff, Derby, Bolton, Leicester, Brighton), and 2 had older stadia albeit with 40k capacity (Sheff Weds, Leeds). Only Ipswich, Forest and Wolves have situations comparable with ours and Wolves are investing heavily in theirs anyhow.
Putting to one side the emotional aspects (this thread is about the business case), The Valley is in a poor location and half of it is basically seats bolted on to an old terrace (East and South). It doesn't make much sense investing in it if a genuine viable opportunity arose in a prime location just a mile away.
you reckon this is not about a new ground its about our history and being sold down the river,
The fact CAFC wont own the ground wont pay all its building costs meaning 2 or more pricks have pocketed the money,
I wouldnt watch or will charlton to do anything of good in the future if it happened i certainly wouldnt attend another game , We fought to come home for why???
Purely in terms of business case I think a new stadium would mean more new supporters deciding to attend games than current supporters deciding to call it a day.
Really? So the 14,800 that were there yesterday would miraculously become what?
you reckon this is not about a new ground its about our history and being sold down the river,
The fact CAFC wont own the ground wont pay all its building costs meaning 2 or more pricks have pocketed the money,
I wouldnt watch or will charlton to do anything of good in the future if it happened i certainly wouldnt attend another game , We fought to come home for why???
Too true mate, I agree but time moves on. How many of the 15,000 (allegedly) there on Saturday were ever around or wholeheartedly involved or even aware when we fought to come home, 40-50%? It's a tough one.
you reckon this is not about a new ground its about our history and being sold down the river,
The fact CAFC wont own the ground wont pay all its building costs meaning 2 or more pricks have pocketed the money,
I wouldnt watch or will charlton to do anything of good in the future if it happened i certainly wouldnt attend another game , We fought to come home for why???
The context of this thread (I think) is to explore how Charlton might one day be viable financially and whether a new stadium could be part of it. The club is currently losing £7-8m pa at The Valley despite the 9th highest gates in the division. Maybe they would be even less viable at a new stadium but it doesn't do any harm to discuss it.
NYA, What is poor about the location of The Valley and why would an upgrade not make sense? I would say that the obvious benefit of re-locating would be that it would offer the option of multi use but surely the O2 already has the pick of these and how would the club benefit from these extra activities anyway? I can't see how it would as the 'venue' would surely not be owned by the club having no money to develop the site?
Compare the 'experience' of a day out at Charlton compared to say Fulham, Chelsea, Arsenal etc. with their easy transport options and loads of bars/ restaurants within walking distance. The Peninsula would offer that too in my view. The Valley offers neither.
it shouldnt be discussed it has no value in discussion it is a ludicrous idea, unless CAFC own the new ground we are lodgers, there is no business sense how would we make money by being a tennant, and that is\what the move is
sell the valley so current or future owners get the money for the ground and the council and cafc do a venture together ,
get the club into the prem at the valley and you dont lose 7-8m pa
get it right off the pitch grow slowly build properly by developing youth and selling them on to build and enhance the playing squad therefore making the prem a real option
not move the club and no longer own the bedrock in which it exists offers you no business plan
Arsenal own the emirates the money generated by their season ticket sales is theirs , The only ground and club to do it
CAFC will never compete with Arsenal,Tottenham,Chelsea on the pitch and we wont even get the same numbers as west ham no chance
its a stupid idea as your market place you want to move in to is flooded and unless you get a rich shiek it is an unreachable dream
to discuss it gives it merit and this deserves none
But as I have said before, there is no easy transport option to the Peninsula for much of our current supporters apart from bus on heavily congested roads.
Compare the 'experience' of a day out at Charlton compared to say Fulham, Chelsea, Arsenal etc. with their easy transport options and loads of bars/ restaurants within walking distance. The Peninsula would offer that too in my view. The Valley offers neither.
What the hell
Football fans in their 1000s go to football grounds how many then go on to resturants , the bars are for before hand not really after you may get a few maybe 50 to 100 people out of 20k that go to a resturant around a ground after a game
this is not about the future of a matchday experience its about a football club losing its identity
Like most I would rather we stay at The Valley. While respecting the views of those who say they would stop going to games in the event the club moving to a new stadium about 1.5 miles away, I can't pretend to understand that position. If it happens (and I still think it very unlikely) the club would still be resident in its historical borough, not a million miles away from the patches of waste ground and the streets that saw it created by those boys in 1905. This would not be a Selhurst Park scenario. If (and I would need to be mightily convinced) a move meant that the club's long term future was strengthened I would reluctantly support it. I would NEVER stop supporting the club.
Putting to one side the emotional aspects (this thread is about the business case), The Valley is in a poor location and half of it is basically seats bolted on to an old terrace (East and South). It doesn't make much sense investing in it if a genuine viable opportunity arose in a prime location just a mile away.
Not true at all in the case of the east stand, which was built over the front of the old terrace and is much steeper. In fact, the rear of the old terrace is behind the east stand concourse.
The location is poor only in the sense that it is constrained by the railway line, the topography, and residential roads that are generally substandard for major vehicle movements. The proximity to the station and the dual-carriageway Woolwich Road, with a bus service much enhanced since the peninsula was developed (ironically) are infrastructure assets that, for example, the New Den doesn't have to the same extent.
Steady chaps. IMHO Football has changed beyond all recognition in the 50 years I have been attending matches and perhaps unfortunately for some I believe change will continue a pace for a while yet. The old model of football clubs located and stadiums built in largely unsuitable places in working class residential areas is well past it's sell by date and clubs that are not well placed to to take advantage by the way football is financed and watched in the coming years will without doubt go to the wall. Charlton are unsustainable at The Valley with ticket costs as they are and commercial opportunities stymied by location and space. The future generations of football fans including Charlton will be enticed by the largely American model of sports stadia. Bright modern, good facilities and with opportunity to spend money on more than a seat and a warm meat pie. Every aspect of our life is changing. Football will be no different.
Don't think I am in favour of moving from The Valley. I'm not but is that because I am part of the old school of football fans that at one point were quite happy to piss up a green slime covered brick wall. My view as unpalatable as it might be is that IF and only if a move secures the name of a Charlton Athletic and offers it a secure future for my grandchildren and theirs instead of dying a death of a thousand cuts then I would reluctantly buy into it.
Steady chaps. IMHO Football has changed beyond all recognition in the 50 years I have been attending matches and perhaps unfortunately for some I believe change will continue a pace for a while yet. The old model of football clubs located and stadiums built in largely unsuitable places in working class residential areas is well past it's sell by date and clubs that are not well placed to to take advantage by the way football is financed and watched will without doubt go to the wall. Charlton are unsustainable at The Valley with ticket costs as they are and commercial opportunities stymied by location and space. The future generations of football fans including Charlton will be enticed by the largely American model of sports stadia. Bright modern, good facilities and with opportunity to spend on more than a seat and a warm meat pie. Every aspect of our life is changing. Football will be no different.
Don't think I am in favour of moving from The Valley. I'm not but is that because I am part of the old school of football fans that at one point were quite happy to piss up a green slime covered brick wall. My view as unpalatable as it might be is that IF and only if a move secures the name of a Charlton Athletic and offers it a secure future for my grandchildren and theirs instead of dying a death of a thousand cuts then I would reluctantly buy into it.
What was ave attendance the last full season at valley compared to that first nearly full season at selhurst?
What is the relevance? In that scenario we were not moving to a shiny new stadium to call our own, we were being forced to camp at a local rival's run down stadium.
What if they, by which I mean our kindly benevolent owners, just made promises, put up lots of architects pretty drawings, sold the Valley and RBG down the river by reneging on their promises to rebuild at the peninsula by using the 'oops sorry chaps but we've gone bankrupt argument'? It's happened elsewhere so why not at the Valley? Monies can get shifted through offshore shell accounts and none of us would have a clue what has gone where and to whom.
Moving the club away quickly would be very risky. I think things would have to improve substantialy on the playing front first. I really don't think 'build it and they will come' would work in these circumstances but I see how in the future it would be a viable option.
The model of football clubs not owning their stadiums is widely used elsewhere in the world and if done properly their is no reason why it can't work. If the figures stack up and we can make it pay at The Valley long into the future then that's great. If they don't and the alternative is oblivion then I know which hook I hang my hat.
Thats what they will have and want you to believe, Sell the ground use it as collateral for a loan and build it like Arsenal then pay it back and then own your ground own your club own the profits
oh no we\couldnt do that as we will never get to europe let alone the champions league that would warrent such grand plans
would rather admin and embarresment and start again
Like most I would rather we stay at The Valley. While respecting the views of those who say they would stop going to games in the event the club moving to a new stadium about 1.5 miles away, I can't pretend to understand that position. If it happens (and I still think it very unlikely) the club would still be resident in its historical borough, not a million miles away from the patches of waste ground and the streets that saw it created by those boys in 1905. This would not be a Selhurst Park scenario. If (and I would need to be mightily convinced) a move meant that the club's long term future was strengthened I would reluctantly support it. I would NEVER stop supporting the club.
For fans from Kent (and there are a lot of us) that 1.5 miles is significant. We drive to games and need somewhere to park without being ripped off.
That, discounting for a moment the far more important emotional arguments, is a "business" reason why many such fans would not be able to come. For some of us our existing outlay on football stretches our budgets enough without a £20 parking charge on top! I realise such an argument is anathema to the green yuppie brigade but many of us who go to football still have to live within the reality of working class budgets rather than marketing La La land!
I would also say that the emotional aspect IS also a business aspect or perhaps I should call it "heritage" like Prague does as he knows more about marketing than me.
Charlton is not a worldwide brand like Man Utd, Liverpool etc, etc who will pick up inner London supporters.
Support of the Club is passed from generation to generation as far as I can see so I'm not convinced enough rich Yuppie types will make up the shortfall if the "core" fan base is alienated.
For me, after 50 years, too much is tied up in The Valley and I really don't give a toss about business bullshit attempting to defend the indefensible. I've watched matches with my late father and grandparents, my brother and my wife and children at The Valley. I would dearly love to bring my grandson when he is old enough. The Valley is Charlton for me.
I'm not going to start again at another ground. If you cannot understand those emotions then we will simply have to agree to differ. I am not articulate enough to explain it in any other way.
Comments
Putting to one side the emotional aspects (this thread is about the business case), The Valley is in a poor location and half of it is basically seats bolted on to an old terrace (East and South). It doesn't make much sense investing in it if a genuine viable opportunity arose in a prime location just a mile away.
The fact CAFC wont own the ground wont pay all its building costs meaning 2 or more pricks have pocketed the money,
I wouldnt watch or will charlton to do anything of good in the future if it happened i certainly wouldnt attend another game , We fought to come home for why???
sell the valley so current or future owners get the money for the ground and the council and cafc do a venture together ,
get the club into the prem at the valley and you dont lose 7-8m pa
get it right off the pitch grow slowly build properly by developing youth and selling them on to build and enhance the playing squad therefore making the prem a real option
not move the club and no longer own the bedrock in which it exists offers you no business plan
Arsenal own the emirates the money generated by their season ticket sales is theirs , The only ground and club to do it
CAFC will never compete with Arsenal,Tottenham,Chelsea on the pitch and we wont even get the same numbers as west ham no chance
its a stupid idea as your market place you want to move in to is flooded and unless you get a rich shiek it is an unreachable dream
to discuss it gives it merit and this deserves none
What the hell
Football fans in their 1000s go to football grounds how many then go on to resturants , the bars are for before hand not really after you may get a few maybe 50 to 100 people out of 20k that go to a resturant around a ground after a game
this is not about the future of a matchday experience its about a football club losing its identity
The location is poor only in the sense that it is constrained by the railway line, the topography, and residential roads that are generally substandard for major vehicle movements. The proximity to the station and the dual-carriageway Woolwich Road, with a bus service much enhanced since the peninsula was developed (ironically) are infrastructure assets that, for example, the New Den doesn't have to the same extent.
Don't think I am in favour of moving from The Valley. I'm not but is that because I am part of the old school of football fans that at one point were quite happy to piss up a green slime covered brick wall. My view as unpalatable as it might be is that IF and only if a move secures the name of a Charlton Athletic and offers it a secure future for my grandchildren and theirs instead of dying a death of a thousand cuts then I would reluctantly buy into it.
Thought we can at The Valley, Elton John played there afew years back.
oh no we\couldnt do that as we will never get to europe let alone the champions league that would warrent such grand plans
would rather admin and embarresment and start again
That, discounting for a moment the far more important emotional arguments, is a "business" reason why many such fans would not be able to come. For some of us our existing outlay on football stretches our budgets enough without a £20 parking charge on top! I realise such an argument is anathema to the green yuppie brigade but many of us who go to football still have to live within the reality of working class budgets rather than marketing La La land!
I would also say that the emotional aspect IS also a business aspect or perhaps I should call it "heritage" like Prague does as he knows more about marketing than me.
Charlton is not a worldwide brand like Man Utd, Liverpool etc, etc who will pick up inner London supporters.
Support of the Club is passed from generation to generation as far as I can see so I'm not convinced enough rich Yuppie types will make up the shortfall if the "core" fan base is alienated.
For me, after 50 years, too much is tied up in The Valley and I really don't give a toss about business bullshit attempting to defend the indefensible. I've watched matches with my late father and grandparents, my brother and my wife and children at The Valley. I would dearly love to bring my grandson when he is old enough. The Valley is Charlton for me.
I'm not going to start again at another ground. If you cannot understand those emotions then we will simply have to agree to differ. I am not articulate enough to explain it in any other way.
.
Can't even afford a few fireworks.