Stadium Development

[ReeceofBDTBL]

The problem isn’t the premier league, the problem is us having a useless chancer for an owner who’s incompetence and lack of finance subjected us to a national humiliation last season, have to go through 38 games in the toughest league in the world with a bottom half of the championship squad.

Be a well run club and do better.

A good football club doesn’t piss opportunities away and uses what it has to grow and achieve on the pitch.

 

[Frank the tank]

The problem isn’t the premier league, the problem is us having a useless chancer for an owner who’s incompetence and lack of finance subjected us to a national humiliation last season, have to go through 38 games in the toughest league in the world with a bottom half of the championship squad.

Be a well run club and do better.

A good football club doesn’t piss opportunities away and uses what it has to grow and achieve on the pitch.

We were in division 4 when I started supporting us and were a laughing stock in our own city so perhaps our expectations are at different levels

 

[The Fox]

Back to stadium development

I think people need to separate the funding and development of the team from development of the stadium.
Both are likely to be independent of each other as one is revenue expenditure and one is capital investment. There's no reason sufficient investment on the football side should effect capital investment or vice versa.

 

[Maidenhead]

We were in division 4 when I started supporting us and we're a laughing stock in our own city so perhaps our expectationsare at different levels

At least you didn't have to suffer the slide down to division 4 though

 

[Maidenhead]

Back to stadium development

I think people need to separate the funding and development of the team from development of the stadium.
Both are likely to be independent of each other as one is revenue expenditure and one is capital investment. There's no reason sufficient investment on the football side should effect capital investment or vice versa.

Unless you have limited financial resources.

Then you have to make choices.

Team every time for me.

 

[The Fox]

Unless you have limited financial resources.

Then you have to make choices.

Team every time for me.

Not necessarily.
The club operation ( team ) funding has to come from revenue ( and losses allowed to be funded by owners) .

These are strictly controlled as we know and have a 3 year rolling cycle

Commercial development, be that stadium or commercial development of retail , leisure , hospitality amongst others is a 20 to 25 year investment which can be with other investors who specialise in this field.


Don't think of a better kop or more seats , think of the site as a commercial development opportunity with a new roof just being a part of that.

 

[ReeceofBDTBL]

We were in division 4 when I started supporting us and were a laughing stock in our own city so perhaps our expectations are at different levels

Fair enough mate

 

[Hobgoblin]

Not necessarily.
The club operation ( team ) funding has to come from revenue ( and losses allowed to be funded by owners) .

These are strictly controlled as we know and have a 3 year rolling cycle

Commercial development, be that stadium or commercial development of retail , leisure , hospitality amongst others is a 20 to 25 year investment which can be with other investors who specialise in this field.


Don't think of a better kop or more seats , think of the site as a commercial development opportunity with a new roof just being a part of that.

I agree, but only if the plan and investment is in sustained success, not let’s have a go at staying in the championship with loans and maybe fluke promotion to the prem for a season. If we are serious about a sustained premier league team, let’s say in the mold of Brighton, we would need more seats and more corporate that’s for sure. If this is the case then the work needs doing before hand to capitalise on success, not afterwards

 

[ancientblade]

We were in division 4 when I started supporting us and were a laughing stock in our own city so perhaps our expectations are at different levels

yes we were in division 4 but what support the team got that season culminating at feethams and 8k at peterborough for a midweek night game we wont see away support like that anytime soon

 

[The Fox]

I agree, but only if the plan and investment is in sustained success, not let’s have a go at staying in the championship with loans and maybe fluke promotion to the prem for a season. If we are serious about a sustained premier league team, let’s say in the mold of Brighton, we would need more seats and more corporate that’s for sure. If this is the case then the work needs doing before hand to capitalise on success, not afterwards

I think that's a conundrum that many clubs face . Stadium development is disruptive and takes time, it means that you end up with limited seats whilst work is completed. ( unless it's a new stadium on a new site ) .
The only time clubs can afford to lose capacity is when your in the PL where matchday revenue is less of a proportion turnover than it is in the EFL . Imagine its a dilemma for those yoyo clubs .

 

[Frank the tank]

I agree, but only if the plan and investment is in sustained success, not let’s have a go at staying in the championship with loans and maybe fluke promotion to the prem for a season. If we are serious about a sustained premier league team, let’s say in the mold of Brighton, we would need more seats and more corporate that’s for sure. If this is the case then the work needs doing before hand to capitalise on success, not afterwards

Brighton lose 50 million a season without player sales
Their model is successful but so was Southampton similar model and eventually you have to change it

If we had an owner willing to lose half a billion I dare say we would be at least as successful as Brighton

 

[Inter_blade83]

Should start on the South Stand ASAP as if indeed we get promoted, we'll need the seats. Also as commercial investment, SS needs to happen before the Kop.

Then when the Kop gets done the 10k seats lost will be slightly offset by the SS upper tier being already there.

If we knocked the Kop down now our capacity would be 21,900. If we did the SS first, it would be 27-28k instead.

Don't get the arguments for giving more seats to away fans. The only way we'd do that is if it were reciprocated... so basically just the pigs. We wouldn't need to give more to away fans anyways.

We struggle to sell out because of the lack of seats available, weirdly enough. When trying to buy a ticket you have to jump through hoops to get one first and foremost. Then you end up with single tickets, or restricted view ones. If we had larger capacity we could loosen the restrictions on buying tickets. People would also be able to sit together rather than buying tickets separately... it puts people off.

 

[Hobgoblin]

I think that's a conundrum that many clubs face . Stadium development is disruptive and takes time, it means that you end up with limited seats whilst work is completed. ( unless it's a new stadium on a new site ) .
The only time clubs can afford to lose capacity is when your in the PL where matchday revenue is less of a proportion turnover than it is in the EFL . Imagine its a dilemma for those yoyo clubs .

And that is exactly the point isn't it? Its not really a choice of invest in the team or invest in the stadium is it. Only the current or new owners truly know, if they plan to sustain the club in the prem or if they are happy to take pot luck every 5 or 10 years. If its the latter just general maintenance is needed if not the work needs doing whilst the demand is not needed, so its in place for the years to come. No owner is going to admit to flirtation (well uncle Kev did in the end), a robust plan is needed to succeed and unfortunately at the moment we don't seem to have a plan for long term sustained success, and that I am afraid is why until someone comes with a proper plan and finances in place (not needing a fire sale each year) we will only be paining the place for the sake of the cameras now and again.

 

[Westran]

I'd love it if the new owners came in and actually did something re stadium development, we know there's work that needs doing to bring it up to standard, the plans are in place, it can be progressed outside of FFP as capital development and would actually make a difference to match day revenue and fan experience. If they're willing to invest in infrastructure, they'll hold some of their investment in the value of the assets they hold, the actual investment might not be so much of a straight loss of the total amount that it costs to complete it.

 

[The Fox]

And that is exactly the point isn't it? Its not really a choice of invest in the team or invest in the stadium is it. Only the current or new owners truly know, if they plan to sustain the club in the prem or if they are happy to take pot luck every 5 or 10 years. If its the latter just general maintenance is needed if not the work needs doing whilst the demand is not needed, so its in place for the years to come. No owner is going to admit to flirtation (well uncle Kev did in the end), a robust plan is needed to succeed and unfortunately at the moment we don't seem to have a plan for long term sustained success, and that I am afraid is why until someone comes with a proper plan and finances in place (not needing a fire sale each year) we will only be paining the place for the sake of the cameras now and again.

I agree but my original point was that it's not either or , it's 2 separate funds of money independent each other . It's not a case of do we spend it on the team or the ground as though its all from the same pot.
I doubt the potential owners aren't very aware of what's needed .

 

[Bladeloyal]

There would be massively less disruption building behind the kop ,extending it by 3/4 k and having a new cantilever roof

 

[Inter_blade83]

There would be massively less disruption building behind the kop ,extending it by 3/4 k and having a new cantilever roof

This wouldn't fix the rake or general shitness of the stand bar the last few rows. The whole thing needs ripping down.

 

[Maidenhead]

Not necessarily.
The club operation ( team ) funding has to come from revenue ( and losses allowed to be funded by owners) .

These are strictly controlled as we know and have a 3 year rolling cycle

Commercial development, be that stadium or commercial development of retail , leisure , hospitality amongst others is a 20 to 25 year investment which can be with other investors who specialise in this field.


Don't think of a better kop or more seats , think of the site as a commercial development opportunity with a new roof just being a part of that.

Did you miss the phrase "limited resources"?

You're assuming that funds would be available to both in which case I would obviously do both too, but the team would always take priority.

 

[Sheffsteel]

The problem isn’t the premier league, the problem is us having a useless chancer for an owner who’s incompetence and lack of finance subjected us to a national humiliation last season, have to go through 38 games in the toughest league in the world with a bottom half of the championship squad.

Be a well run club and do better.

A good football club doesn’t piss opportunities away and uses what it has to grow and achieve on the pitch.

Not sure I agree.
We were quite poor when we were promoted, relying on Southgate style tactics, decent defence and relying on individual skill (eg N'Diaye).
We lost N'Diaye and Berge but it was great business getting so much (30 million) for them approaching the final year of their contract.
Imagine the uproar if we'd kept them, with them both leaving for £0.00. We'd be in financial meltdown, much worse than now.

Also that £30 million was re-invested in the transfer budget, so we ended up spending over £60 million euro on players.
However I think the team coming up was so bad, we needed to spend at least £150 million on players to compete.
Another massive factor last season was our terrible injury list, our defensive stalwart Egan was out all season.
McBurnie and Brewster was often injured. We buy an experienced midfielder from Everton and he's injured almost all season.

I suppose you wanted to owner to be a chancer and take risks, there's never any gaurantee a risk will work.
2 seasons ago he was a chancer, we should have sold N'Diaye and Berge but he rejected the bids, risking everything on being promoted.
The fact we were promoted suggests it was the best decision, so he was a good chancer, not a useless one.

Also we are a well run club.
Would you suggest we did a Nottingham Forest and recklessly spend big.
The irony is Forest have stayed up and they all probably think they have a great owner.
However if they had been relegated there would have been a financial melt down at that club with massive debts.
Their fans would have been pleading sympathy insisting they have the worse owner in the entire league.

For many people the competency of an owner is based on what they do.
It's all down to whether that club are promoted or relegated but there can only ever be 3 clubs promoted and 3 clubs relegated, so judging an owner on promotion/ relegation seems unfair, other issues should be taken into account.

Regards the new owners, you can bet most will want them to take huge gambles buying big money players.
They would call it ambition but surely that mindset would be reckless putting the future of our club at danger.
"Investment" is like taking out a loan, it's great when you first receive but people need to realise it needs paying back with interest.

 

[Balham]

Should start on the South Stand ASAP as if indeed we get promoted, we'll need the seats. Also as commercial investment, SS needs to happen before the Kop.

Then when the Kop gets done the 10k seats lost will be slightly offset by the SS upper tier being already there.

If we knocked the Kop down now our capacity would be 21,900. If we did the SS first, it would be 27-28k instead.

Don't get the arguments for giving more seats to away fans. The only way we'd do that is if it were reciprocated... so basically just the pigs. We wouldn't need to give more to away fans anyways.

We struggle to sell out because of the lack of seats available, weirdly enough. When trying to buy a ticket you have to jump through hoops to get one first and foremost. Then you end up with single tickets, or restricted view ones. If we had larger capacity we could loosen the restrictions on buying tickets. People would also be able to sit together rather than buying tickets separately... it puts people off.

Current capacities (these add up to more than the total so presumably they're number of seats, including those we don't or can't sell) ^denotes approximate
Kop 10,221
Laver Stand* 7,500^
John Street 6,800^
Bramall Lane End 5,680
Bramall Lane Corner 1,900^
Terrible Corner 900

Presume you're talking about United adding a new tier to the existing Laver Stand and keeping much of the existing space open, much like Liverpool did at Anfield? The plans as currently submitted (and you can guarantee that they'd be redone) add 5,400 to the capacity with the second tier and corporate space.

FWIW I fully agree on us being at capacity but only when we're either flying in the Championship or not being abysmal in the Premier League.

 

[Hobgoblin]

I agree but my original point was that it's not either or , it's 2 separate funds of money independent each other . It's not a case of do we spend it on the team or the ground as though its all from the same pot.
I doubt the potential owners aren't very aware of what's needed .

yes indeed sorry you did state that, they are not the same for sure, in business you can shift budgets around but in general you have different budgets, to deliver your plan, you cant have our stadium as is as a sustained premier league team. its is not big enough and certainly has no wear need enough corporate, all boxes where sold last year apart from a few held back for big teams where they charged an absolute fortune for the one match. Never did I see one space in the tony Currie seats from the south stand (the leather seats) and may I presume the same for the souths stand. A season ticket in one of these leather seats is over £3k and that is dirt cheap compared to sustained premier league clubs. If and if we had a plan i would have though we would need double the boxes and maybe all executive seats moving to an extended south stand (upper tear) as per previous plans. After that we probably wouldn't need much more to be honest apart of course from removing the posts on the KOP . All we need is a proper plan, oh and one big thing the cash to deliver!!!!

 

[S64 Blade]

Did you miss the phrase "limited resources"?

You're assuming that funds would be available to both in which case I would obviously do both too, but the team would always take priority.

By always, does this have no end date, or consideration for necessity to improve the infrastructure? If we went 20 years with limited resources, does the ground continue to suffer and we run the risks of parts of the ground being closed/unfit for supporters? What about if we are running on limited resources for 50 years?

Or, to flip it around, the club throughout its history has been run on limited resources. The ground is not the same as it was in 1889.

 

[Sheffsteel]

Brighton lose 50 million a season without player sales
Their model is successful but so was Southampton similar model and eventually you have to change it

If we had an owner willing to lose half a billion I dare say we would be at least as successful as Brighton

You do realise that Brightons and previously Southampton success is all based on their high player sales.

Last season our net spend was higher than Brighton.
They are one of the few clubs that regularly make a profit due to selling their star players.

Last season Brighton sold players costing 190 million
Caicedo for 116 million euro
Macallister for 42 million euro
Sanchez for 23 million euro
Our sales was a record high managing to bring in 30 million euro for Berge and N'Diaye.

Bettis actually mentioned this on a recent YouTube video where he was interviewed by Bladesway (I think).
People might see Brighton spending 150 million on players where as they've brought in 180 million in sales, so their net spend is ZERO. Our massive downfall is that (unlike in the past) no PL clubs want our players, so when we only spend 50 million on players, that's actually a 50 million net spend.

 

[Sheffsteel]

Brighton lose 50 million a season without player sales
Their model is successful but so was Southampton similar model and eventually you have to change it

If we had an owner willing to lose half a billion I dare say we would be at least as successful as Brighton

I remember hearing on Talksport that Brighton are the model club. They hardly spend a penny (regards net spend) but are still thriving.
For some reason their better players always seem to be in demand for big money, it used to be the same at Southampton.

Just done a google search and the 1st result shows:

" Brighton announce record profit after best Premier League season. Brighton have announced a record profit of £122.8m in the 2022-23 financial year - the most successful season in the Premier League club's history."

 

[Frank the tank]

I remember hearing on Talksport that Brighton are the model club. They hardly spend a penny (regards net spend) but are still thriving.

Just done a google search and the 1st result shows:

" Brighton announce record profit after best Premier League season. Brighton have announced a record profit of £122.8m in the 2022-23 financial year - the most successful season in the Premier League club's history."

Yes but it's took a loss of 500 million to get there and those profits are from player sales bought and funded by those losses including the scouting system

An average season for them before last was a 50 m loss covered by the owner

 

[The Fox]

No club reaches into its bank account and plucks out £50m for a stand or £500m for a stadium . The financing these is complex , involves several parties and is long term . Yes it needs paying back but if what you've built is raising revenue during that time it's sustainable. Its why I feel ground development has to go hand in hand with commercial development, property and facilities that generate money every day of the year not just matchdays .
We are limited on what we spend on the football side by our revenue and regulation. On the stadium and buildings less so .
We don't need the cash as pointed out to do this but clearly there needs to be a plan .

 

[ColinHill]

Saying ‘they were bankrolled’ is utterly irrelevant.

Bankrolled or not, their fans saw success. Every club has an owner, ours have brought us nothing.

Portsmouth, Middlesbrough, Swansea, Wigan, Southampton

Fulham have played most of the 21st century in the top flight and played in Europe. Even hull have played in Europe and got to a cup final recently.

Blackburn - a league title, Europe and a league cup win

Along with their time in the top flight Palace have got to a cup final and I wouldn’t mind one of their 3 play off final wins either. Don’t know about you but winning a big game and having a day in the sun this side of the rapture wouldn’t go a miss.

Birmingham city have won a league cup ffs. Them and Middlesbrough used to be THE teams that have never won anything. That came and went while Utd achieved fuck all.

Bolton had a decade in the top flight, often in the top half, got to a cup final and played in Europe.

The success Brighton have been having would transform our club.

Even putting aside leicesters league title and the fa cup win. Even before all that, in the last 30 years they’d won a play off final and two league cups.

Stoke city, ten years solid in the top flight, a cup final and played in Europe.

Wolves currently in a period of success.

West Brom had 14 out of 17 years in the prem

Forest still had European football and a league cup win in the 90s, a decade on from unimaginable success.

So my point still stands, for a club of our size, what the hell have we had in return for our incredible support?

I’ve been supporting the club for over 30 years, I love the club, but in terms of what I’d hoped to have seen from my club it’s been shite.

Thanks, you give me some good examples there, ones i'd forgotten about..

I dont think the bankrolling being irrelevant argument stacks up. Blackburn for example dont win anything without Jack Walkers money. Ditto Pompey (they nearly lost their club due to shit ownership), Boro without Gibson, Brighton without Bloom or their model of selling talent off and buying cheaper. Wealthy owners who are willing to spend makes a hell of a difference in terms of what can happen.

Good points though in relation to West Brom, Swansea, Birmingham.

Thing for me when any one says 'club of this size' and 'incredible support' is its hypothetical, it doesnt mean anything, its all in the eye of the beholder. Clubs might be 'small' and have 'poor support', but money changes it all. Look at Hoffenheim in Germany, they were tiny but money changed it all. Same for clubs in England i.e. Bournemouth, Brentford.

 

[Sheffsteel]

Saying ‘they were bankrolled’ is utterly irrelevant.

Bankrolled or not, their fans saw success. Every club has an owner, ours have brought us nothing.

Portsmouth, Middlesbrough, Swansea, Wigan, Southampton

Fulham have played most of the 21st century in the top flight and played in Europe. Even hull have played in Europe and got to a cup final recently.

Blackburn - a league title, Europe and a league cup win

Along with their time in the top flight Palace have got to a cup final and I wouldn’t mind one of their 3 play off final wins either. Don’t know about you but winning a big game and having a day in the sun this side of the rapture wouldn’t go a miss.

Birmingham city have won a league cup ffs. Them and Middlesbrough used to be THE teams that have never won anything. That came and went while Utd achieved fuck all.

Bolton had a decade in the top flight, often in the top half, got to a cup final and played in Europe.

The success Brighton have been having would transform our club.

Even putting aside leicesters league title and the fa cup win. Even before all that, in the last 30 years they’d won a play off final and two league cups.

Stoke city, ten years solid in the top flight, a cup final and played in Europe.

Wolves currently in a period of success.

West Brom had 14 out of 17 years in the prem

Forest still had European football and a league cup win in the 90s, a decade on from unimaginable success.

So my point still stands, for a club of our size, what the hell have we had in return for our incredible support?

I’ve been supporting the club for over 30 years, I love the club, but in terms of what I’d hoped to have seen from my club it’s been shite.

Great post....when you put it like that I feel depressed ha ha
and when you add Wednesday to that list based on their last 25 years......seems like there's a curse on Sheffield.

In fact add Bradford City, Huddersfield, Barnsley and even Leeds (based on their size and potential should be doing much better).
There's been so much under achievement or non achievement by Yorkshires football teams......is there something in the water?

 

[ChipButtyBlade]

 

[Icepop]

A couple of things added recently to Sheffield Council planning site...

FANZONE
https://planningapps.sheffield.gov....ctiveTab=summary&previousKeyVal=005GWNNYLI000


PLATINUM SUITE

https://planningapps.sheffield.gov.uk/online-applications/buildingControlDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=SG03T4NY0IA00