St James' Park

[Jonas]

Seems like our chances of relative success would only slightly improve either way (expansion/move) under present rules.

A few thousand seats either way isn't going to change anything in regards to competing with the teams were aiming to compete with.

Might be worth baring in mind re what we'd be getting and what we'd be giving up for little palpable gain football wise.

[timeEd32]

7 minutes ago, Kanji said:

I’d love to know what / how an income bridge looks for ticket, hospitality, boxes, concessions etc versus those clubs. But you see my points, I hope. It’s a massive gap to bridge - if that gap is closed up by 30-40m with new stadium per year, then we’re on to something there. 
 

think you want to get to city and Liverpool’s level. I don’t think we have much chance with London clubs. 
 

again gotta factor in ticket prices in the main. People go berserk any time they are raised. 

 

 

 

 

We'll probably be in the mid-40s for 2023/24 with the CL games and stuff. We still have some season ticket holders on Ashley era price freezes. We could probably say £50m is possible in a good year (good meaning extra home games from cups and/or Europe) in the current stadium.

 

But Liverpool have now added another 8k or so seats from these numbers. Liverpool were at £87m in 2021/22 so with the extra seats and a season with extra games they are basically at £100m. City are adding another 7k (plus a hotel, fan zone, and museum). Chelsea are exploring options and Man United is probably going even bigger.

 

Newcastle can't and shouldn't have London ticket prices, which to me is just another argument for more capacity given the interest/demand. 8-10k seats on top of the Gallowgate won't really do much to close the gap and probably doesn't make fiscal sense.

[Jonas]

8 minutes ago, timeEd32 said:

 

Newcastle can't and shouldn't have London ticket prices, which to me is just another argument for more capacity given the interest/demand. 8-10k seats on top of the Gallowgate won't really do much to close the gap and probably doesn't make fiscal sense.

That a Fulham based not on history as is supposed to be the point of these current rules but purely on luck of geography will have bigger gate revenues than Sunderland or Middlesbrough, with investment from outside sources contraband, is a mockery and another case of the already advantaged being advantaged more.

 

 

Edited September 25 by Jonas

[Kanj]

5 minutes ago, timeEd32 said:

 

We'll probably be in the mid-40s for 2023/24 with the CL games and stuff. We still have some season ticket holders on Ashley era price freezes. We could probably say £50m is possible in a good year (good meaning extra home games from cups and/or Europe) in the current stadium.

 

But Liverpool have now added another 8k or so seats from these numbers. Liverpool were at £87m in 2021/22 so with the extra seats and a season with extra games they are basically at £100m. City are adding another 7k (plus a hotel, fan zone, and museum). Chelsea are exploring options and Man United is probably going even bigger.

 

Newcastle can't and shouldn't have London ticket prices, which to me is just another argument for more capacity given the interest/demand. 8-10k seats on top of the Gallowgate won't really do much to close the gap and probably doesn't make fiscal sense.

 

Yep, like i said, without knowing the breakdown of matchday income and comparing the detail behind it, really hard to get a real concrete answer here.

 

I do think PIF/RB need to show their goal and ambition with an impressive stadium and traning ground/academy plan + any other additional investment to the area and region to show some additional ambition and intent. 

[Kanj]

London's inflated base of matchday income due to location doesn't help. I assume london ticket prices, while higher, on a relative basis are easier for the local fan to stomach versus that exact price in the North. 

[Kanj]

Are a London club's P&L then not really applicable to a North East club? Where there is a different revenue and cost structure based on local economy and/or constraints? 

[Doc]

2 hours ago, Wallsendmag said:

 

Think Pink sold out there as well. 

Just looked like it cos of the seats mate.

[RobsonsWonderland]

The club needs to find ways of the stadium generating money 365 days a year.

 

From bars and restaurants for the masses to top end cuisine for those with serious money to spend.

 

I'm sure spurs even have a go kart track on site, so what can we do to get the kids parents spending money !

 

At present the facilities remind me of an 80s social club.

 

[TheBrownBottle]

1 hour ago, Kanji said:

 

Yep, like i said, without knowing the breakdown of matchday income and comparing the detail behind it, really hard to get a real concrete answer here.

 

I do think PIF/RB need to show their goal and ambition with an impressive stadium and traning ground/academy plan + any other additional investment to the area and region to show some additional ambition and intent. 

Man City don’t have notably higher ticket prices than NUFC - it’s the corporate that shifts the dial, doubling their income relative to ours.

 

If we remain sat at sub-£40m match day income, then we can’t compete.  We won’t be able to make up the £100m difference with Spurs and Arsenal via commercial revenues - and theirs are already far higher than ours.

 

It is true that we won’t ever be able to match ticket prices to the London clubs - but a new ground with hugely expanded corporate would have been the solution.  Abramovich used to flog corporate boxes at Chelsea for a million per season.

 

Concerts etc are basically meaningless, mind.  I’ve seen plenty of comments re what the SOS gets to host - and hosting Beyoncé and Springsteen hasn’t made much of a dent in Sunderland’s commercial income.  The ground can only take in pretty much the same as a regular fixture; only you now have to give a sizeable chunk to the performer.  A single league cup home match would bring in more cash. 

[LFEE]

1 hour ago, Kanji said:

Are a London club's P&L then not really applicable to a North East club? Where there is a different revenue and cost structure based on local economy and/or constraints? 

Exactly. One size fits all rules don’t do us any favours.

[Kanj]

16 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said:

Man City don’t have notably higher ticket prices than NUFC - it’s the corporate that shifts the dial, doubling their income relative to ours.

 

If we remain sat at sub-£40m match day income, then we can’t compete.  We won’t be able to make up the £100m difference with Spurs and Arsenal via commercial revenues - and theirs are already far higher than ours.

 

It is true that we won’t ever be able to match ticket prices to the London clubs - but a new ground with hugely expanded corporate would have been the solution.  Abramovich used to flog corporate boxes at Chelsea for a million per season.

 

Concerts etc are basically meaningless, mind.  I’ve seen plenty of comments re what the SOS gets to host - and hosting Beyoncé and Springsteen hasn’t made much of a dent in Sunderland’s commercial income.  The ground can only take in pretty much the same as a regular fixture; only you now have to give a sizeable chunk to the performer.  A single league cup home match would bring in more cash. 

 

the cost to pay the promoter, artist, ticketing revenue share etc may make it less lucrative. 

[TheBrownBottle]

14 minutes ago, Kanji said:

 

the cost to pay the promoter, artist, ticketing revenue share etc may make it less lucrative. 

Agreed - the numbers don’t amount to much, even if you host two or three big concerts in the summer.

 

Spurs also don’t make crazy money from the NFL games (I don’t understand why so many think this is a massive revenue earner - the ground holds the same number, you can check out the ticket prices, and Spurs don’t receive 100% of that income, unlike PL games) - the thing people are missing is that Spurs make nearly £1m per match on food and drink.  Which is logical, given that it works out as less than £20 per head.  The problem for NUFC is that the ground is located where it is, and culturally the fans do what they always do - which is to enjoy the watering holes in the city before trundling up to the match. 
 

I’d be no different, mind.  But from the club’s perspective, the ground’s location is actually has a massive retardant effect on match day revenues.  So they’d need to be smart to have any chance of catching up.  

[Whitley mag]

The most interesting part of the Douglas article is the new board member linked to the Reuben’s property portfolio, either Jamie is taking a step back, or they’re getting people in place for the infrastructure projects.

[Waddles mullet]

You do know we are moving, all this bull we are staying etc . Do you think for one minute these would reduce the capacity for a couple of years to expand? the whole ground is knackered. It would take years man. We won’t be moving far btw 

[Wilson]

Glad that's cleared up. 

[Danh1]

 

Great, another club leaving us behind 

[Dr.Spaceman]

[AyeDubbleYoo]

12 hours ago, TheBrownBottle said:

Agreed - the numbers don’t amount to much, even if you host two or three big concerts in the summer.

 

Spurs also don’t make crazy money from the NFL games (I don’t understand why so many think this is a massive revenue earner - the ground holds the same number, you can check out the ticket prices, and Spurs don’t receive 100% of that income, unlike PL games) - the thing people are missing is that Spurs make nearly £1m per match on food and drink.  Which is logical, given that it works out as less than £20 per head.  The problem for NUFC is that the ground is located where it is, and culturally the fans do what they always do - which is to enjoy the watering holes in the city before trundling up to the match. 
 

I’d be no different, mind.  But from the club’s perspective, the ground’s location is actually has a massive retardant effect on match day revenues.  So they’d need to be smart to have any chance of catching up.  

 

Also Spurs sell nice/expensive food and drinks. 

 

FWIW Spurs stadium is also surrounded by places to eat and drink, albeit not standard city centre options like we have. 

 

 

Edited September 26 by AyeDubbleYoo

[Monters]

4 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:

 

Also Spurs sell nice/expensive food and drinks. 

 

FWIW Spurs stadium is also surrounded by places to eat and drink, albeit not standard city centre options like we have. 

 

 

 

I was told (never been myself so could be bollix) that Levy wanted the Spurs food and drink to be less expensive than the surrounding area to try and get fans in earlier and staying longer after games when they were first building the ground

[AyeDubbleYoo]

1 minute ago, Monters said:

I was told (never been myself so could be bollix) that Levy wanted the Spurs food and drink to be less expensive than the surrounding area to try and get fans in earlier and staying longer after games when they were first building the ground

 

I don't think he's achieved that, not sure though. They serve things like Beavertown beer, guess it's expensive. I didn't buy any food.

 

The retail store is incredible though, people were coming out with bags and bags of stuff. 

[Fenham Mag]

1 hour ago, Danh1 said:

 

Great, another club leaving us behind 

 

That's a carbon copy of Brentford's stadium. 

[SteV]

21 minutes ago, Fenham Mag said:

 

That's a carbon copy of Brentford's stadium. 

That’s the current ‘concept’ for stadiums that’s in vogue now.

 

20 years or so ago it was your ‘soulless bowls’, the likes of your Stoke, Swansea, Leicester etc.

[PauloGeordio]

 

[LFEE]

Has its critics on here for its simplicity but i keep looking at the stands and elevation gradient and how big each block is and think it will be a bear pit personally.

 

 

[Pixelphish]

Just now, LFEE said:

Has its critics on here for its simplicity but i keep looking at the stands and elevation gradient and how big each block is and think it will be a bear pit personally.

 

 

 

Of booing.