St James' Park

[AyeDubbleYoo]

20 minutes ago, Fenham Mag said:

I'm absolutely begging them to extend Gallowgate, modernise all four stands to make it look somewhat all the same all the way around (like the Aviva in Dublin but to a lesser extreme). 

 

100 more executive boxes stretched around Gallowgate and Leazes. 

 

Completely refurbish the corporate. 

 

The stadium is the most perfectly positioned in the world IMO - don't want to lose that. 

 

I can’t see how it can be made big enough though.

[sushimonster85]

Past few years it's been "if you stay still you're actually moving backwards" in the PL. 

 

We're rapidly approaching the point where it's "if you're improving you better be doing it at at least the pace of others or you're getting left behind."

As long as FFP/PSR are the reality then anyone who's taking the big strides to improve their matchday/events income will, in time, move past us if we don't. For better in worse, within 5-10 years the PL will likely be comprised on 20 teams with these money making machines of stadiums like Spurs etc. The quicker we get to that point, the quicker we can unlock the potential that comes with the sheer wealth of our principle owners. 

 

I do concur it's not an easy dilema to solve, the history and fanbase of this club imparticular can sometimes make this sort of heartstring stuff harder than it would be for another club. You think a Bournemouth fan is going to twist at the idea of leaving the Vitality for a 40k stadium which, thanks to it being more modern/having more corporate, will likely generate more than a 52k SJP does on a matchday?  

[Wallsendmag]

12 minutes ago, Fenham Mag said:

I'm absolutely begging them to extend Gallowgate, modernise all four stands to make it look somewhat all the same all the way around (like the Aviva in Dublin but to a lesser extreme). 

 

100 more executive boxes stretched around Gallowgate and Leazes. 

 

Completely refurbish the corporate. 

 

The stadium is the most perfectly positioned in the world IMO - don't want to lose that. 

 

 

Put simply there just isn't the space at the current SJP for all the extra corporate, boxes etc. Look at the footprint of our ground and then compare to Spurs or Arsenal and see what I mean. We just don't have the room. We're currently paying Fenwicks and Hadrians Tower to host a lot of our corporate supporters.

 

End of the day it depends what people want. If you're happy to give the really best performing clubs in the Country a £200m headstart every season as a trade in for remaining at SJP then that's fair enough, there's plenty in that boat I guess.  

 

If you're wanting to explore what could well be a once in a lifetime opportunity to see how big this club can get, to have us up there with the very best in the Country from a financial perspective, and to give us the very best opportunity to not only get right up there, but stay there, then the trade off would be leaving SJP. If it was a hop over to Leazes Park or Castle Leazes I personally can't see the issue there. Ultimately it's a plot of land, the actual structure perched on it resembles nothing like it did when I started going there back in 1984.

 

If the trade off was to an out of town location I'd suggest it's an entirely different conversation altogether, and not one people would be on board with.

 

My opinion is that the happy medium is the one I'd be most behind. Ultimately I just want the club to be the best it can possibly be, and not hamstrung in any way shape or form.

[OverThere]

2 hours ago, Tross said:

Need to stay at current site at all costs, we move then clubs deed.

Absolute nonsense.

[El Prontonise]

2 hours ago, Tross said:

Need to stay at current site at all costs, we move then clubs deed.

 

[bobbydazzla]

1 hour ago, Fenham Mag said:

I'm absolutely begging them to extend Gallowgate, modernise all four stands to make it look somewhat all the same all the way around (like the Aviva in Dublin but to a lesser extreme). 

 

100 more executive boxes stretched around Gallowgate and Leazes. 

 

Completely refurbish the corporate. 

 

The stadium is the most perfectly positioned in the world IMO - don't want to lose that. 

 

 

All well and good if you don't mind putting up with:

 

1) working within some major design limitations due to the surrounding buildings / infrastructure at the current site 

2) a reduced capacity for a number of seasons, at a time when we're going through the best period on the pitch for 30 year and ticket demand is huge

3) the negative financial implications of point 2

4) the negative implications for match going fans of point 2

 

 

 

 

Edited 4 hours ago by bobbydazzla

[bobbydazzla]

We need these two to film an episode at SJP. They'd have our options sorted toot suite

 

 

 

[MagCA]

Just now, bobbydazzla said:

We need these two to film an episode at SJP. They'd have our options sorted toot suite

 

 

 

In all seriousness, I hope they are planning some sort of video series for this decision making process. Build out that content dashboard please. 

[Kid Icarus]

A reminder that getting rid of SJP based on the argument of not getting left behind very much means still being left behind in reality. If you want to get in and others to be able to get in, fair enough like, but these arguments about PSR, matchday income, tickets being available to those who can't afford it etc are all either pretty baseless or result in negligible benefits vs what's lost in the process. 

 

 

 

Edited 4 hours ago by Kid Icarus

[Chris_R]

Regarding commercial income and especially sponsorship, we've had consecutive finishes of 4th then 7th in the PL. Assuming we finish top 6 again this year, which looks likely, on what grounds could the Sky cartel suggest we're not deserving of sponsorship agreements in-line with those in the "top 6"?

 

I think we'd have every right to sign deals of a similar magnitude and if anyone complained we should just point to the last 3 years' league tables, and invite them to get fucked.

[Wandy]

4 hours ago, Paulinho said:

Is that what’s happening at Newcastle? We’re losing our best players while getting further and further away from winning a trophy?

 

Completely bizarre fantasy where people think moving to a 70k corporate bowl at the Silverlink would magically produce success. It wouldn’t, it’d just further neuter the match day experience while allowing gorms on the internet to brag about attendances like Top Trumps. 

 

NUFC are never moving to Silverlink, or anywhere like it.

[bobbydazzla]

17 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

A reminder that getting rid of SJP based on the argument of not getting left behind very much means still being left behind in reality. If you want to get in and others to be able to get in, fair enough like, but these arguments about PSR, matchday income, tickets being available to those who can't afford it etc are all either pretty baseless or result in negligible benefits vs what's lost in the process. 

 

 

 

 

 

What I see from that graph is:

 

Our matchday revenue is way behind the cartel clubs

As is our commercial revenue

And our broadcast revenue

 

We need to increase all 3 streams to become genuinely competitive

 

So we need more revenue being generated by the stadium. Which we'll struggle to do if we stay / renovate at SJP. For starters, match day revenue would drop for some critical years as we significantly reduce capacity during stadium renovation

 

We need more commercial revenue. Which we'll do by being successful and getting more sponsors. But to be more successful we need more total revenue

 

We'll get more broadcast revenue by being more competitive and getting more merit money, again, success is driven by commercial and match day revenue

 

How does staying at SJP help our commercial position ?

 

 

 

 

Edited 4 hours ago by bobbydazzla

[OverThere]

17 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

A reminder that getting rid of SJP based on the argument of not getting left behind very much means still being left behind in reality. If you want to get in and others to be able to get in, fair enough like, but these arguments about PSR, matchday income, tickets being available to those who can't afford it etc are all either pretty baseless or result in negligible benefits vs what's lost in the process. 

 

 

 

 

Word salad. Our match day revenue is 38 and it has to be raised to above 100 to compete. The commercial revenue can also be massively increased with other events associated with the stadium. You can't do that at SJP.

 

 

Edited 3 hours ago by OverThere

[Kid Icarus]

1 minute ago, bobbydazzla said:

 

What I see from that graph is:

 

Our matchday revenue is way behind the cartel clubs

As is our commercial revenue

And our broadcast revenue

 

We need to increase all 3 streams to become genuinely competitive. We'll struggle to increase the match day revenue by staying at SJP, in fact match day revenue would drop for some critical years as we significantly reduce capacity as we expanded the stadium

 

So we need more revenue being generated by the stadium. Which we will struggle to do if we stay / renovate at SJP

We need more commercial revenue. Which we'll do by being successful and getting more sponsors. But to be more successful we need more revenue

We'll get more broadcast revenue by being more competitive and getting more merit money

 

How does staying at SJP help our commercial position ? 

 

 

 

So you think there'll be a chain reaction with the other income streams that starts with moving stadium resulting in increased non-matchday revenue and going from there?

[Whitley mag]

1 hour ago, Fenham Mag said:

I'm absolutely begging them to extend Gallowgate, modernise all four stands to make it look somewhat all the same all the way around (like the Aviva in Dublin but to a lesser extreme). 

 

100 more executive boxes stretched around Gallowgate and Leazes. 

 

Completely refurbish the corporate. 

 

The stadium is the most perfectly positioned in the world IMO - don't want to lose that. 

 

I hope it’s nowt like the Aviva, can’t think of anything worse, or more soulless than some big glass structure with barely any extra seats for the East Stand.

[Kid Icarus]

7 minutes ago, OverThere said:

Word salad. Our match day revenue is 38 and it has to be raised to above 100 to compete. You can't do that at SJP.

 

I think it's fairly easy to understand like. A matchday income increase of that level isn't a silver bullet and barely moves the needle overall. If there's an argument for a stadium move being the catalyst for a 'big 6' style commercial income leap I'm genuinely all ears, but I've never seen it put forward.  

 

 

Edited 3 hours ago by Kid Icarus

[bobbydazzla]

7 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

 

So you think there'll be a chain reaction with the other income streams that starts with moving stadium resulting in increased non-matchday revenue and going from there?

 

It's not about a chain reaction, the hard facts are you need to increase all 3 to be competitive. And increase all 3 at the same time

 

And staying at SJP will limit our ability to increase 1 of the 3 streams. Whilst our ground has an amazing city centre location, that's also it major weak point due to the environmental limitations that restrict its expansion

 

If you look purely at maximising every aspect of our income potential then staying at SJP makes very little sense financially, it's an emotional decision

 

 

 

Edited 3 hours ago by bobbydazzla

[AyeDubbleYoo]

You need to increase all 3 but matchday income from normal fans has the least impact and the lowest ceiling. 

[Kid Icarus]

5 minutes ago, bobbydazzla said:

 

It's not about a chain reaction, the hard facts are you need to increase all 3 to be competitive. And increase all 3 at the same time

 

And staying at SJP will limit our ability to increase 1 of the 3 streams. Whilst our ground has an amazing city centre location, that's also it major weak point due to the environmental limitations that restrict its expansion. 

 

Staying at SJP makes very little sense financially, it's an emotional decision

 

 

Yeah and tbf we're football supporters not finance supporters so I do welcome it being an emotional decision to stay with open arms. If the financial argument isn't strong enough (which I don't think it is) then I don't think it's worth it. 

 

 

Edited 3 hours ago by Kid Icarus

[bobbydazzla]

8 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

 

Yeah and tbf we're football supporters not finance supporters so I do welcome it being an emotional decision to stay with open arms. If the financial argument isn't strong enough (which I don't think it is) then I don't think it's worth it. 

 

 

 

 

Sadly, football is all about the finances

 

If we want to be truly competitive then the emotion has to come second to the money

 

I'm not saying that's right, in fact it depresses me that it's the situation, but that's the reality of modern football and being in a league that has allowed a cartel to pull the drawbridge up

 

 

 

Edited 3 hours ago by bobbydazzla

[Wallsendmag]

10 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

 

I think it's fairly easy to understand like. A matchday income increase of that level isn't a silver bullet and barely moves the needle overall. If there's an argument for a stadium move being the catalyst for a 'big 6' style commercial income leap I'm genuinely all ears, but I've never seen it put forward.  

 

 

 

 

Did t senior figures at the club not tell supporters a few month ago how much more revenue could be achieved with a new stadium at that fan event at the Stack?

 

It was a massive game changer.

[Dr Jinx]

2 hours ago, LFEE said:

It’s what’s GOING to happen…

 

Thats the problem with some people. They can’t look any further than their own noses at times. This is about the next 10-20-30-40 years and beyond when I’m long gone not about us sitting 5th and still in two cups this season.

 

The UEFA regulations are going to be stricter than than the EPL current ones which already now we are having to sell players we don’t want to and not able to buy anyone of progressive note in 2 possibly 3 transfer windows. Wages unfortunately is the main way to keep players without success and they are intrinsically tied to both sets of rules. Here’s a little heads up. Players wages rarely go down.

 

As it stands at the start of each season Man City can spend £260m more than us due to their turnover ratio alone never mind their ability to sell youth players unable to make the first team for £30-40m (or a backup striker for £85m) which are fees we see as a mainstay first teamers which makes their transfer pot even greater than £260m bigger. They are currently increasing their capacity to an already modern stadium.  
 

Arsenal have similar advantages and they’ve realised within 20years they were a bit shortsighted in their new ground capacity and now looking to increase and make the gap bigger.

 

Spurs are making something like £100m more despite tied to £25m per year interest payments on the new stadium which they’ll eventually pay off.

 

Chelsea are the closest to maybe trying to do things whilst staying at a small ground but the cheapest tickets that leads to is around £90 and have a completely different economical catchment area as well a 20 year head start on us.

 

Liverpool have expanded too and still have one eye in the future to move if they can’t keep up and they’ve a 20 year head start also.

 

Everton and Villa will challenge in the chasing pack despite where they currently lie in the table. Even Leeds and others not even in our division.

 

Look what Real Madrid have built and Barcelona are building amongst other clubs in Spain and Europe.

 

I think it’s you who’s living in fantasy land thinking remaining as we are will lead us to the top table of European football. We are only anywhere close because Howe is a miracle worker and we’ve had an almost perfect success rate in the transfer window. That will not always be the case and as the other clubs get bigger and bigger any thought of silverware will feel just as distant as it did under Ashley.

 

I think most agree the location needs to be as central as possible for a new stadium. Turning your nose up at a fully paid for new stadium that would bring multi generational change is nothing but shortsightedness.
 

 

 

Man City's finances are on steroids so not a good comparison. We seem to be doing things in the right way which in some ways is admirable, but we'll forever lag behind those other clubs until we get a bit cheeky.

 

I'm choosing to believe that PIF are making long term subtle moves that will position us well over a longer period of time, although there's not a whole heap of evidence to support that.

 

Announcing a massive stadium development will for sure add to our revenue over that longer period of time but really, i think showing that commitment would do wonders as well because currently, we really don't know what their end game is.

 

 

[OverThere]

14 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

 

I think it's fairly easy to understand like. A matchday income increase of that level isn't a silver bullet and barely moves the needle overall. If there's an argument for a stadium move being the catalyst for a 'big 6' style commercial income leap I'm genuinely all ears, but I've never seen it put forward.  

 

 

 

"Isn't a silver bullet". Hmmm ok. I thought that killed vampires but I digress. Explain how it doesn't move the needle at all to bring your revenues in line with Liverpool, Arsenal etc?

[Abacus]

1 minute ago, OverThere said:

"Isn't a silver bullet". Hmmm ok. I thought that killed vampires but I digress.

 

Werewolves 

[LFEE]

2 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

 

I think it's fairly easy to understand like. Matchday income increase isn't a silver bullet and barely moves the needle overall. If there's an argument for a stadium move being the catalyst for a 'big 6' style commercial income leap I'm genuinely all ears, but I've never seen it put forward.  

Just going off your own figures you should have yours answers.

 

Look at the match day of us Vs Spurs who shall we agree for arguments sake a club in the big six bracket of similar success to ourselves albeit a couple of more ECL campaigns. It’s £118m v £48m. Their new stadium is around 20% bigger than current SJP (62k v 52k) yet our new one you’d assume be 50% bigger than SJP (75-80k).

 

Then you’ve got the commercial income of £228m v £47m which is intrinsically linked to the stadium and what it can be used for none match days and the fact they are paying £25m interest payments for the loans for the stadium we wouldn’t.

 

If £346m (£371m)v £95m is not moving the dial I’m not sure what is. Try and find Spurs figures for last year at WHL. That would be interesting to see.

 

As for broadcast money that will increase with success which is hopefully improve by the other two figures combined.

 

Look at Man Utd’s match day figures with a similar non multipurpose built stadium not based in London like ours with the only advantage is it’s capacity (74k) and corporate areas it allows which would be similar to what we are looking to build at a minimum. £136m v £38m. They are looking at a new multi purpose stadium heading towards 85-100k.