St James' Park

[Colos Short and Curlies]

4 hours ago, Groundhog63 said:

 

True. Here's Liverpool's catchment area 

 

 

You need add Scandinavia to that map, and I'd say they dominate all of Wales for English club support

 

[TRon]

13 hours ago, TheBrownBottle said:

All arguable tbf mate - Liverpool is a much larger city, as is its catchment area.

 

But all their local support has probably thrown their lot in with Liverpool now apart from the diehards. 40 years of domination by one club will do that to a fanbase. That's why they've gone with a smaller stadium, they know it as well.

[Groundhog63]

7 minutes ago, Colos Short and Curlies said:

 

You need add Scandinavia to that map, and I'd say they dominate all of Wales for English club support

 

Tbf, it was just a bit of fun. If I serious I'd have just stuck the globe on 😂

[patrone]

Canny 

 

Pedestrian zone next to St James' Park confirmed

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cnvzdn3r1reo

 

 

 

Edited yesterday at 13:02 by patrone

[Dr Jinx]

Will they change it then if we build a new stadium behind SJP?

[ponsaelius]

Worth making clear that's Strawberry Lane (running north to south past the strawberry) rather than Strawberry Place which is the main road along past the Gallowgate.

[madras]

Just now, ponsaelius said:

Worth making clear that's Strawberry Lane (running north to south past the strawberry) rather than Strawberry Place which is the main road along past the Gallowgate.

Isn't the bottom half it pedestrianised already ?

[Big River]

Just now, ponsaelius said:

Worth making clear that's Strawberry Lane (running north to south past the strawberry) rather than Strawberry Place which is the main road along past the Gallowgate.

 

does that cover the bit of road going down past the Costa/Nero/whatever it is as well?

[ponsaelius]

No that's St Andrews St, so I presume that stays open as is for now, but it effectively becomes a dead end so can't be used as a cut through.

 

The context and feel of that road has changed since the One Strawberry Lane development finished and it was resurfaced - so this is just regularising it really.

 

 

Edited yesterday at 13:26 by ponsaelius

[ponsaelius]

4 minutes ago, madras said:

Isn't the bottom half it pedestrianised already ?

 

Yes, has been for ages since those developments were built out, probably 2008ish?

 

Since the Strawberry block was finished it's all been resurfaced and has the feel of a pedestrianised area anyway, and is already closed off on matchdays. This is a pretty logical step to regularising it and doesn't really seem worth of any news articles.

 

[patrone]

3 minutes ago, ponsaelius said:

...doesn't really seem worth of any news articles.

 

 In your opnion, of course

[ponsaelius]

Worth noting there's also an application in to demolish Percy House (The ugly building with Milligans in it).

 

I'd imagine whatever ultimately replaces it will be expected to include a through route onto the rear lane. You can see how the One Strawberry Lane development was required to surface that and make it more inviting with the expectation that the context would soon change.

[mattypnufc]

2 minutes ago, ponsaelius said:

Worth noting there's also an application in to demolish Percy House (The ugly building with Milligans in it).

 

I'd imagine whatever ultimately replaces it will be expected to include a through route onto the rear lane. You can see how the One Strawberry Lane development was required to surface that and make it more inviting with the expectation that the context would soon change.

Let me guess...student accommodation  

[ponsaelius]

Yes I would say that would be a pretty reasonable bet.

[madras]

48 minutes ago, ponsaelius said:

 

Yes, has been for ages since those developments were built out, probably 2008ish?

 

Since the Strawberry block was finished it's all been resurfaced and has the feel of a pedestrianised area anyway, and is already closed off on matchdays. This is a pretty logical step to regularising it and doesn't really seem worth of any news articles.

 

I knew it had been paved but didn't know if it still had vehicular access for loading etc.

[Wolfcastle]

13 hours ago, TheBrownBottle said:

Everton’s average gate has dipped below 20k only once since the Great War - in 83/84, when it dropped to just over 19k.  Which was the case for pretty much every club in that era.  

Well that's considerably lower than ours that same year then when we were a division lower and not winning FA Cups.

 

 

 

[Danh1]

Can anyone get this article?

 

 

[JT24]

2 minutes ago, Danh1 said:

Can anyone get this article?

 

 

Try sticking the URL into 12ft.io

 

Worked for me earlier but didn't give me a URL to copy, unfortunately.

[cubaricho]

What a honking article title.

[JT24]

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2025/feb/21/newcastle-owner-st-james-park-future-stadium

 

Louise Taylor posted this earlier too. Lots of movement in the press.

[Dr.Spaceman]

5 minutes ago, Danh1 said:

Can anyone get this article?

 

 

 

https://archive.ph/yPG9o

 

Lazy.

[Stifler]

Representatives of Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund will fly into the North East next week for a crunch “off-site” meeting about Newcastle United.

In previous years these meetings have taken place in the grandiose surroundings of Alnwick Castle, as captured by Amazon’s fly-on-the-wall series, We Are Newcastle United.
 

It is not known where the meeting will take place this time but the chief executive, Darren Eales, is expected to be there, as is the sporting director, Paul Mitchell, and Jacobo Solis, recently appointed to the club’s board of directors. But the spotlight will fall on Brad Miller, Newcastle’s chief operating officer, the man charged with tiptoeing through something akin to the Geordie Brexit: the question of whether to remain at St James’ Park or leave.

 

Not since 1892, when a meeting took place in the home of Joseph Bell that would lead to Newcastle East End, a football club from Heaton, taking over the lease from Newcastle West End, at St James’ Park, has something with such historical significance taken place.

Newcastle (East End) were playing games at St James’ Park for several months before, in December 1892, the club were renamed Newcastle United.

Now, 133 years later, Newcastle United are deciding whether they have outgrown their spiritual home.

 

It was on the eve of Newcastle’s visit to the Etihad Stadium last week that the Newcastle head coach, Eddie Howe, was asked what it would take to close the gap on Manchester City.

“Usual stuff from me,” he replied. “Stadium. Income. Sponsorship. All the stuff that we need to increase our revenue.”

City’s estimated annual turnover of £695million is more than double that of Newcastle’s £308million. Those are the numbers that could lead to the demolition of one of English football’s most famous grounds.

 

There are two potential plans left on the table. One is to stay on the present site and expand the Gallowgate End to a capacity of 60,000 (it cannot go bigger because of restrictions to the East Stand). The other is to build a new stadium, a giant bowl structure, beyond the Leazes End, in Leazes Park, with a capacity of 70,000.

 

The Times understands that senior figures have already been walked around the potential Leazes Park site and there is now an increased expectation in higher echelons that the club could be ready to move.

The London-based architects KSS, who designed Leicester’s training ground, have been in meetings with Newcastle about a potential new stadium since before October last year.

KSS, who were behind Le Havre’s 25,000-capacity Stade Oceane stadium, said in a statement: “KSS has a clear policy of not commenting on any commercially sensitive projects, particularly sports-related projects.”

Secrecy has surrounded all stages of the process. The club have steadfastly refused to comment and insist no decision has been made, and repeated that stance when approached by The Times this week.

 

Newcastle have been down the road of trying to move ground before, when, in 1997, plans were revealed for a 55,000-seat stadium modelled on the San Siro that could have been extended to 70,000, on the city’s Town Moor, not far from the existing stadium.

The plans brought a furious reaction from protesters at the time, who gathered 36,000 signatures to protect a green area of the city of Newcastle that had been in common ownership for 700 years.

A group called No Business on the Moor and another called Friends of Leazes Park fought the club all the way at a series of explosive city council meetings.
 

Contrary to recent suggestions, Newcastle successfully gained planning permission back then, only to balk eventually at costs they thought would run into hundreds of millions and a continued threat of legal challenges to the proposals.

 

“We didn’t have the cash they have now,” Sir John Hall, whose family were the club’s majority shareholders, said. “You have the right owners who have the wealth to do it at this moment. It would have been mega money to build a new ground. It was also too difficult in terms of having to fight for the planning, which would have taken us years.”

Newcastle instead borrowed £55million to take the stadium to its present 52,300 capacity, expanding the Milburn Stand and the Leazes End, although not the problematic East Stand (since 1952 Leazes Terrace behind it has listed building status through English Heritage).

Hall, who first went to St James’ Park and stood on the Popular Terrace (now the East Stand) when he was an eight-year-old, added: “There was always a regret that I didn’t build a super stadium. Did we miss a trick? Some people might say yes, but it was a risk.

“It’s not a big area, the North East. You’re not sure what you’re going to get. We thought the catchment was around a million people.”

That appears a crucial fact overlooked. Can Newcastle justify a 70,000-seat stadium? Tyneside, including areas north and south of the Tyne, has a population of about a million people. Newcastle Upon Tyne itself has a population of 300,000.

 

The big question that has not been addressed so far is how a new stadium or an upgrade to St James’ Park will be funded. Everton’s new stadium at Bramley-Moore Dock cost £850million and the Tottenham Hotspur Stadium, which opened in 2019, was £1billion.

Liverpool’s recently completed Anfield Road Stand cost £100million. That increased the capacity at Liverpool, champions of Europe six times, to 61,276. Work being undertaken at Manchester City, the Premier League winners on eight occasions, will raise capacity at the Etihad to 62,170.

A new 70,000-seat stadium would make it the second-biggest football ground in Britain. The Times has been told the cost would be between £1.5billion and £2billion.

 

Newcastle are, of course, owned by Saudi Arabia’s PIF, a sovereign wealth fund that was said to be worth £700billion when the takeover of Newcastle was completed in October 2021 and has an aim to increase its worth to £2trillion.

In November it was reported that PIF was preparing to cut budgets on some local projects for a second year. It is thought that this will not affect Newcastle United and their plans and that any spending would be funded by PIF as part of the club’s infrastructure and would be reflected in a rise in the value of the club. Thus it would not affect Profitability and Sustainability Rules, which has restricted Newcastle to no major signings in three successive transfer windows. “We need to add [to the group],” Howe said recently.

Figures from Off the Pitch, an expert website on football finances, show Tottenham’s match-day revenue was £52.7million in 2017. In 2023 it had increased to £135.2million. Chelsea, in the same period, and without a new ground, showed a much more moderate rise, from £76.2million in 2017 to £87.9million in 2023.
 

Brad Miller’s background was in the aviation and property sectors before his appointment as Newcastle’s chief operating officer in May 2024. A chartered surveyor by background, Miller has been tasked with leading the club through this historic decision.

When Newcastle previously presented a detailed questionnaire to supporters last summer, 71 per cent were in favour of staying at St James’ Park.

At a We are United fan event in November at the Stack, a venue just outside of St James’, Miller addressed the 2,000 or so supporters there and said: “A new stadium has the potential to earn a lot more, both on match days and non-match days.”

An informal show of hands that night from supporters when asked if they would prefer to move showed a majority would. Miller mouthed the word “wow” at the result.

 

St James’ Park is one of the ten chosen stadiums to host the European Championships in 2028. Renovation or a new stadium would need to be completed six months before the competition for it still to be part of the tournament, a spokesman from Uefa said.

 

There remain mixed opinions as to what should happen now.
 

The supporter Yousef Hatem, in an opinion piece in True Faith, a Newcastle fanzine, said: “If you think we can have it all, that we can move to a new or substantially revamped ground, without losing something intrinsic, something irretrievable, along the way, then I envy you that optimism.”

St James’ could not have put on a much louder display as to why it should remain Newcastle’s home, way beyond 2025, in the recent Carabao Cup semi-final victory against Arsenal. Then it was a spine-tingling, night-time cauldron.

“I’m sure a lot of people watching that game will be thinking, ‘Wow, what an atmosphere, what an environment to play in,’ ” Howe said.

“It’s a really delicately poised decision and, of course, I’m not making that decision, which is quite a relief.”

For others at Newcastle United, however, their decision will rumble through the ages, and that moment in history is getting closer.

 

 

Edited yesterday at 22:06 by Stifler

[Stifler]

So they reckon it will cost between £1.5bn-£2bn.

I did think the £1.2bn figure from a few weeks back seemed low.

[Ben]

Just now, Stifler said:

So they reckon it will cost between £1.5bn-£2bn.

I did think the £1.2bn figure from a few weeks back seemed low.

 

I reckon they would still make a profit if they sold after a couple of years so it's the ultimate investment 

[JT24]

My feeling is PIF will balk at the cost and timescale of a new stadium and opt for the expansion.