St James' Park

[SteV]

6 hours ago, Keegans Export said:

You don't need to move completely away from the ballot to allow people more control over where they end up.

 

At the moment there are three categories I think? So really you could end up anywhere. Surely it wouldn't be that difficult to create more categories that people could apply for?

 

If you make it clear which areas are safe standing/focused on making an atmosphere, then people who want to do that can apply for tickets in those areas. If that isn't what you want, you apply for tickets in one of the other areas. 

Totally agree. 
 

Allowing people to choose a specific block shouldn’t be that hard.

 

Allow people to see the numbers associated with that block - 50 seats available - average number of people applying to that block is 400.

 

Then people can make informed decisions over whether they want to go for the area they really want or an area that will give them the best chance of a ticket.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, SteV said:

Totally agree. 
 

Allowing people to choose a specific block shouldn’t be that hard.

 

Allow people to see the numbers associated with that block - 50 seats available - average number of people applying to that block is 400.

 

Then people can make informed decisions over whether they want to go for the area they really want or an area that will give them the best chance of a ticket.

 

If you do that though, say there's 300 seats in a certain area and 4,000 go for them because it's The Corner for example, there's going to be even less chance of getting tickets? 

[ponsaelius]

Just have a ballot and then allow winners a period of time to then go on the website and pick their seat.

 

People will naturally then pick where is more in line with their sensibilities. Particularly if we have more clearly defined singing sections.

 

Those not picked in timeframe then go back on general sale.

 

Don't see any issue with this. It would be better than both last season's free for all and this season's nonsense.

 

 

Edited March 14 by ponsaelius

[gbandit]

An incredibly common sense solution that has seemingly no drawbacks, surely we have to lobby for that?

[r0cafella]

Listening to the athletic podcast and they are discussing man united stadiums and sir rats grand plans had me wondering why are we so slow? Our owners have been in place much longer and yet besides a few comments patient lip service and a “feasibility study” we’ve heard nothing more about  it’s been rather quiet. 
 

Do we assume it’s not a priority? What’s everyone’s thoughts 

[Nucasol]

35 minutes ago, r0cafella said:

Listening to the athletic podcast and they are discussing man united stadiums and sir rats grand plans had me wondering why are we so slow? Our owners have been in place much longer and yet besides a few comments patient lip service and a “feasibility study” we’ve heard nothing more about  it’s been rather quiet. 
 

Do we assume it’s not a priority? What’s everyone’s thoughts 

Man Utd’s is an absolute necessity for them. The roof actually has holes in it. I imagine the pounds, shillings and pence they’ll be leaving on the table compared to the Bernabau and Nou Camp v.2.0s, the Allianz from corporate day trippers will potentially be huge. Us, not so much.

[r0cafella]

1 minute ago, Nucasol said:

Man Utd’s is an absolute necessity for them. The roof actually has holes in it. I imagine the pounds, shillings and pence they’ll be leaving on the table compared to the Bernabau and Nou Camp v.2.0s, the Allianz from corporate day trippers will potentially be huge. Us, not so much.

It should be for us no? How many fans are missing out from watching us? Also our owners wealth and ambition should mean all issues can be overcome without issue. 

[SAK]

30 minutes ago, r0cafella said:

Listening to the athletic podcast and they are discussing man united stadiums and sir rats grand plans had me wondering why are we so slow? Our owners have been in place much longer and yet besides a few comments patient lip service and a “feasibility study” we’ve heard nothing more about  it’s been rather quiet. 
 

Do we assume it’s not a priority? What’s everyone’s thoughts 

NUFC aren’t a PIF priority let alone a stadium. So far grand statements of wanting to be the best are just that, empty words.

Seems like the chairman hasn’t made as many appearances as last season. Think they got into this without much thought about the rules others would impose on them and are a bit bored with their not so shiny toy as they can’t push on as they would like.

 

Sorry for the doom & gloom but I don’t feel our owners have the same fight as the City owners and this passive approach will encourage others to tighten rules further.

[SteV]

12 hours ago, Optimistic Nut said:

 

If you do that though, say there's 300 seats in a certain area and 4,000 go for them because it's The Corner for example, there's going to be even less chance of getting tickets? 

Yes, but that’s your choice of whether to apply for there or not. 
 

At least you’re making an informed decision of whether to apply for the area you really want, or an area that gives you the best chance of getting in.

[r0cafella]

1 minute ago, SAK said:

NUFC aren’t a PIF priority let alone a stadium. So far grand statements of wanting to be the best are just that, empty words.

Seems like the chairman hasn’t made as many appearances as last season. Think they got into this without much thought about the rules others would impose on them and are a bit bored with their not so shiny toy as they can’t push on as they would like.

 

Sorry for the doom & gloom but I don’t feel our owners have the same fight as the City owners and this passive approach will encourage others to tighten rules further.

If what you’ve written was true it wouldn’t surprise me. That being said I can’t categorically state it’s the case.

 

I do feel as though we could have been quicker mind and it does feel as if we put our hands up and say what can we do rather than actually doing anything about this predicaments we find ourselves in. 
 

The below was said two years ago and seemingly no progress made. 
 

While they aim to increase the 52,000 capacity at St James’, there are no plans to build a new stadium. “It would be like tearing your soul out,” Ghodoussi says.

They are looking at sites for a purpose-built, world-class training ground. “That will probably take three years, maybe a little bit more,” Ghodoussi says.

 

 

[SteV]

9 hours ago, ponsaelius said:

Just have a ballot and then allow winners a period of time to then go on the website and pick their seat.

 

People will naturally then pick where is more in line with their sensibilities. Particularly if we have more clearly defined singing sections.

 

Those not picked in timeframe then go back on general sale.

 

Don't see any issue with this. It would be better than both last season's free for all and this season's nonsense.

 

 

 

How do you get round the issue of people (families being the main example) who have applied and been successful as a group and there not being seats together by the time they get on to the site?

 

 

Edited March 15 by SteV

[r0cafella]

And sorry for the double post but the more I think about it, the more I think a new stadium is an absolute must. 

[TBG]

Not a dig, but can we please get over the notion that just because the Chronicle isn't reporting what size screw heads are being used, it must mean the club aren't actively looking/planning.

 

 

[OpenC]

19 minutes ago, SAK said:

NUFC aren’t a PIF priority let alone a stadium. 

 

Aye this is my view like  genuinely don't think they're that arsed about nufc, Eddie Howe's performance, stadium, whatever. 

 

[Yorkie]

1 minute ago, OpenC said:

 

Aye this is my view like  genuinely don't think they're that arsed about nufc, Eddie Howe's performance, stadium, whatever. 

 

 

What's this view based on? There's been consistent investment since they arrived. 

[r0cafella]

5 minutes ago, TBG said:

Not a dig, but can we please get over the notion that just because the Chronicle isn't reporting what size screw heads are being used, it must mean the club aren't actively looking/planning.

 

 

Oh no doubt, point being Man United have just had the guy buy the minority stake and he’s already whipping up a committee with local stakeholders and going cap in hand to the Govt. Meanwhile on Tyne side two years later crickets. 
 

And to be clear here, this talk of competing with Man United and Chelsea within 5 years isn’t me talking, it’s the words of the ownership. I’m just curious to see what gives and asking for others opinions. 

[NSG]

I mean, we clearly are a priority. We’re just one of many priorities.

 

You don’t get the chairman of PIF jetting in on a regular basis, wearing a NUFC stitched jacket and doing an interview where he said he wants us to be number 1 in the world, if we’re not a priority.

[r0cafella]

Just now, Yorkie said:

 

What's this view based on? There's been consistent investment since they arrived. 

I think it’s based upon them being tied up in various rules which will make raising the required money to challenge practically impossible. 

[Yorkie]

Just now, r0cafella said:

I think it’s based upon them being tied up in various rules which will make raising the required money to challenge practically impossible. 

 

That's just pure conjecture though. There's no actual evidence that the ownership has a lack of interest in the club. 

[r0cafella]

1 minute ago, Yorkie said:

 

That's just pure conjecture though. There's no actual evidence that the ownership has a lack of interest in the club. 

I think the point is, and openc can correct me from his view. 
 

Is that it doesn’t actually matter weather they lack interest or not, ultimately if they aren’t allowed to invest (which they aren’t as the rules are written) and they don’t challenge said rules (no evidence we are mounting any challenges) then we simply will be stuck at a level which is someway shy of the other big clubs. 
 

We can’t be successful without investment and we can’t invest without being successful. It’s vicious cycle. The owners are obviously aware of this because they accepted spend equates to performance in the Documentary. 

[Pablo]

I’m absolutely convinced that to progress a new stadium is a must. Standing still is going backwards. 

[OpenC]

I'm not saying they're not interested at all, and it's amazing that we're being run in a much more professional way and investment is being made available.  I find it hard to believe, of course, that they bought NUFC solely to save us from the clutches of Mike Ashley and give the fans a taste of being run like a Leicester - but aye, I also think there would maybe have been more sabre-rattling and challenging of the blatant anti-competition rubbish which continues to just spiral, if they were pushing for global superpower status rather than just investing in a club trying to do the right thing. 

 

It's just been my feeling for a while and SAK is the first person I've seen post similar; I've got no strong evidence for it one way or another, but I've been tempted to post it in the Eddie Howe thread for weeks when people post that PIF will be losing patience.  I'm not sure they're even looking

 

 

Edited March 15 by OpenC

[OpenC]

Personally speaking I would rather they ran us like a Leicester than a PSG, and I'm sure I'm not alone in that

[r0cafella]

1 minute ago, OpenC said:

Personally speaking I would rather they ran us like a Leicester than a PSG, and I'm sure I'm not alone in that

I want to see them invest aggressively initially especially into infrastructure so we can stand on our own two feet. 

[Fezzle]

1 hour ago, TBG said:

Not a dig, but can we please get over the notion that just because the Chronicle isn't reporting what size screw heads are being used, it must mean the club aren't actively looking/planning.

 

 

Also people forget we realistically wont do anything to SJP til 2028 thanks to the Euros and the huge logistical task of the Gallowgate foundations should we stay put.