Is There Any Reason For An Owner To Spend Money Upgrading The Valley?

MuttleyCAFC said:

If I was the SMT, I wouldn't bother with upgrading them whilst I was renting the stadium. Surely you can source some second hand replacements if stadiums are getting rid. The important factors are 1) we don't fall foul of EFL regulations and 2) cost effectiveness. The stadium still looks great on TV and from a distance but probably needs some yellow paint as a priority which a lot of us would volunteer to do if the club asked.

You seem to be missing health and safety standards that are a basic requirement.

The club has always scrimped and scraped when spending money on fire alarms, emergency lights, fire extinguishers etc, I would hate to think what those systems are like now 

MuttleyCAFC said:

I was thinking that all comes into EFL regs. My point was there are things you have to spend money on and things you don't. The question with the lights is surely the money you save with electricity using LEDs. But if the numbers don't add up then surely it is easy to source a few halogen bulbs.

I assume you are talking about the floodlights. If so the main part of the cost will be labour and access equipment. I may be wrong and access to the lights can be gained via the roof at the back of the stand but I am not aware this is the case 

If not it’s a huge job getting access equipment onto the pitch and then going up and doing the work 

I’ve always posted that the day the club called a halt to expanding the ground was the day the club unintentionally decided to get relegated. At the time, clubs with less than a 40k capacity stadium were basically make-weights and treading water until the season they were relegated. I suspect that bar has been reset at 60k though because West Ham have a ground at that capacity and they are definitely treading water and not competing imo the qualification probably needs to be that they need to own the stadium or all the rights to making money out of it as well.

of course teams with smaller capacity grounds do have very good spells but that comes at a cost because they steadily increase their outgoings as a result and, without the commercial income to support it, like Icarus they fly too close to the sun and then fall.

would we fill the 27k Valley in the Championship ? If we were in a similar position in the league as we are now in L1 I suspect we could get some 20+ crowds, certainly 18/19k could be the norm but there would likely be some sell out matches.

would a 27k capacity keep us in the PL ? I doubt it, teams that have come up have struggled and it’s because they can’t commit to being in the PL for longer than one season so they basically set out to fail imo.

would we fill a 40k stadium in the PL (which was what was previously planned). ?, almost definitely.

would 40k be enough to establish us for a while in the PL ? Yes, particularly if we can also extend the rear of the West Stand into the car park and increase the corporate/hospitality capacity- there is some serious money being charged in the PL for this and people are prepared to pay for it, particularly those flying into London from overseas and wanting to take in a game when they do (and the prices for a match have been well north of the cost of Charlton’s £600+ season tickets).

Would 40k establish us to handle successful seasons in the PL ? Possibly, but I doubt it.

Was the recently erected badge thing on the North paid for by the club? I have no issues with the badge as such but if the club paid for it when there are other more pressing issues that makes no sense. 

stoneroses19 said:

randy andy said:

If we got promoted back to the premier league we would obviously need more hospitality and media space. The solution that springs to mind is lose the top tier of the west stand, allowing expansion of the press gallery and two levels of executive boxes/studio space/etc. where the seating currently is.  You'd need to maintain a least some seating up there, maybe a handful of rows between the press gantry and the executive boxes to allow continued use of the lounge up there.

Then expand the Jimmy seed, filling in the corners, raising the roof to match the Curbishly stand and extend backwards. Overall capacity would be around 32k, but with massively more hospitality and media space. There's also room for another 4 or 5 boxes at the back of the Curbishley stand, but alone that won't add much income.

Of course this is all pie in the sky, nothing is happening whilst we don't own the ground, nor whilst we're 2 promotions away from the promised land.

I know it's only your idea, but I hope we'd never do that to the west stand. 

Those stands where there's multi level of boxes, instead of fan seats are very ugly. One of the reasons I dislike going to Orient is we have to sit opposite that ugly stand of a few seats than floors of interior space. 

I don't disagree. It wasn't a suggestion based on my own preference, just a realistic assessment of how a significant amount of hospitality space could be added without having to rebuild the stand. I think you could do something that looks much nicer that the Orient effort, but it would be a compromise. The far more expensive, but more aesthetic solution would be to remove the top tier, add in a second level of hospitality and then reconstruct a smaller top tier. It wouldn't look that much different to the current arrangement, but would offer significantly more hospitality space.

So like the away end at Villa, but with the larger tier at the bottom and the smaller above.

Athletico Charlton said:

YTS1978 said:

lancashire lad said:

Get real!!! - the ground is owned by RD, he has no reason to improve the Valley and the current leaseholders would be foolish to improve an asset that they don't own.

Is that not Roland's responsibility though? If we lease the ground it should be fit for purpose (floodlights etc), right? Obviously it's not his responsibility to expand it though.

Edit. I think a lot of people were just talking about hypothetical improvements btw. But floodlights and stuff are very real concerns for when we're playing championship football next season 😉

No, It is a standard commercial FRI lease.  That means it is the tenants (us) responsibility to fully repair and insure the building at all times whilst under the lease.  

eaststandmike said:

Let’s face it, the only money that our current owners will spend on the Valley will be to keep it ticking over and to comply with safety standards 

If rumors are to be believed they have made a mess of the new pitch trying to maintain it on the cheap and we can all see the floodlights need investment 

They talked about putting solar panels on the roof, that may happen if they could get most of it covered by grant funding and see a pay back within the residual lease term I guess.

Thanks for confirming @Athletico Charlton I had no ideas of the ins and outs of the lease.

sam3110 said:

I'd sooner pull down the JS and rebuild it like the stand at La Bombonera, no seats just a wall of hospitality. Yes it might be ugly and unique but we'd get more hospitality money out of it and you won't have to worry about building height etc as it backs into a hill

If Charlie had his way. I am sure this would happen if he had the assets.

New West stand and away ends, proto-types already in existence and Roland will like these;

West stand;


Away end- focal point for dining and dancing-




Savour that away end for a moment. Anyone seen worse anywhere in the world?

Lordflashheart said:

JamesSeed said:

killerandflash said:

I can't see the Jimmy Seed failing any safety requirements that couldn't be fixed easily. It's a simple roof over a concrete terrace, and was upgraded to 90s safety standards when we returned. Of course a larger and better stand would be desirable, but won't be needed until we're in the PL or at least a top Championship club.

The general public facilities around the ground do need improvement, the toilets, the bars etc. Even if the Curbs stand isn't expanded, the area of wasteland behind the stands does feel like a waste, maybe it could be dug out to create a covered bar area. The roof would be low enough to not affect the houses behind.

It had seats when it was built.

I’m sure it started out as terracing (when the stand was built) ?

All seater stadiums were enforced in 1994 the Jimmy Stead Stand has been around since the 1980s, so would of been. 

It was built on the old terrace in 1978. The seats were added two to three years later.

Get Stacey Solomon in and her bloke off Eastenders in, they will knock it into shape in a day.

JamesSeed said:

killerandflash said:

I can't see the Jimmy Seed failing any safety requirements that couldn't be fixed easily. It's a simple roof over a concrete terrace, and was upgraded to 90s safety standards when we returned. Of course a larger and better stand would be desirable, but won't be needed until we're in the PL or at least a top Championship club.

The general public facilities around the ground do need improvement, the toilets, the bars etc. Even if the Curbs stand isn't expanded, the area of wasteland behind the stands does feel like a waste, maybe it could be dug out to create a covered bar area. The roof would be low enough to not affect the houses behind.

It had seats when it was built.

No it didn’t. It was a covered terrace when first built.

WHAddick said:

a cracking tie or two in that picture!

A cracking footballing legend or two as well. Stanley Matthews, Matt Busby, Sailor Brown for starters.

JustFloydRoad said:

Lordflashheart said:

JamesSeed said:

killerandflash said:

I can't see the Jimmy Seed failing any safety requirements that couldn't be fixed easily. It's a simple roof over a concrete terrace, and was upgraded to 90s safety standards when we returned. Of course a larger and better stand would be desirable, but won't be needed until we're in the PL or at least a top Championship club.

The general public facilities around the ground do need improvement, the toilets, the bars etc. Even if the Curbs stand isn't expanded, the area of wasteland behind the stands does feel like a waste, maybe it could be dug out to create a covered bar area. The roof would be low enough to not affect the houses behind.

It had seats when it was built.

I’m sure it started out as terracing (when the stand was built) ?

All seater stadiums were enforced in 1994 the Jimmy Stead Stand has been around since the 1980s, so would of been. 

the two are entirely disconnected.