The Holiday Inn Monstrosity.

[The Colonel 0]

correct me if I am wrong, isnt there a tunnel between the N+P and the Jarrold stand? do you have to have one at each end?

[Bury Yellow 2]

Ah the usual Wynnies on this thread supporting their beloved board.

The hotel decision was another poor one in a long line of them. There are only a very small number of rooms that could be described as having a full view of the pitch.

Surely the club could renegotiate with the hotel group so that we could have some seating and a screen so that at least it improves what is an appalling carbuncle on what is suppose to be a football ground!!

Some of us told the board this was a bad decision but hey they know best as always. I also think this may well have been another nail in the coffin of Barry Skipper selling his shares to the Turners.

As for having to sell the land, there was no ''have to'' but also shows the boards total lack of pride, respect and business accumen

My dream is that one day we will sell up Carrow Road and build a 40,000 seater on the outskirts of the city. If the club get themselves in gear this could coincide with the 2018 World Cup application get a grant and be the Eastern Region stadia.

[nutty nigel 7,537]

Well alllllrrrrriiiiiggghhht...

I was just pointing out that when the plans went forward to build the hotel, where it is now, in 2003, many people thought it was a good idea. That was at the time the team was doing well and it seemed everything the club did was a good idea.

I''m not sure if a corner infill in that particular corner would be at all cost effective and would like to see the figures for a corner infill there and cost per seat compared to another tier on the City Stand.

 

[nutty nigel 7,537]

[quote user="Bury Yellow"]Ah the usual Wynnies on this thread supporting their beloved board. The hotel decision was another poor one in a long line of them. There are only a very small number of rooms that could be described as having a full view of the pitch. Surely the club could renegotiate with the hotel group so that we could have some seating and a screen so that at least it improves what is an appalling carbuncle on what is suppose to be a football ground!! Some of us told the board this was a bad decision but hey they know best as always. I also think this may well have been another nail in the coffin of Barry Skipper selling his shares to the Turners. As for having to sell the land, there was no ''have to'' but also shows the boards total lack of pride, respect and business accumen My dream is that one day we will sell up Carrow Road and build a 40,000 seater on the outskirts of the city. If the club get themselves in gear this could coincide with the 2018 World Cup application get a grant and be the Eastern Region stadia.[/quote]

Am I a Winnie then Bury Yellow? According to Mr Carrow we are all thick and sllooowwww in Norfolk too, except him of course. And you''re not in Norfolk so I bet that lets you out too. But both of you supported the board in 2003 when the hotel decisions were made. Now you change your minds, which of course is your right to do. Me? I have little opinion either way on "Heartbreak Hotel". I didn''t in 2003 and I don''t now. What makes a fan a Winnie in your view Bury? Do Winnies deserve relegation while total Jessies deserve better?

 

[barclay seats 4849 0]

I like it ....................................................

[? 20]

Some of you must have awfully simple, gifted, or boring lives, to get this worked up about a hotel.

Does it really matter?

[Desert Fox 0]

?

The answer is yes. It does matter becuase the clubs obsession with off the pitch activities is impacting upon our on the pitch performance - which is something we all care about.

[nutty nigel 7,537]

Well I''ll take your word for it Desert Fox because I haven''t got a clue about how much the hotel has impacted on our on the pitch performance. However, from where I''m sitting, two successive managers wasting two successive years player budgets has had a huge impact on our on the pitch performance. And yes the board appointed those two managers so they are responsible but short of putting them in the stocks in the centre-circle and stoneing them there''s not a lot we can do about it.

 

 

[grantroederdisaster 0]

I don''t like it because such a hotel could of been put on to the back of an infill which is what most other clubs do!

 

If we''d of stayed up longer than one season then its possible it may of been done better on the back of an infill!

 

The potential infill in this area would of held no more than 1800 and this would of been cut down in order to segregate the away fans!

 

Maybe in the future with mega rich owners it may get knocked down!!

[Rethinking the future 0]

[quote user="TheCanaryFan"]

The Holiday Inn Hotel Carrow Road is an absolute monstrosity. A pefect example of how to ruin a perfectly good football club with corporate greed and ill judged financial control. A potential corner fill stand would have cost a quater of the price and potentially boosted the ground attendance by 3,500 but instead the board decided that 50 ''executive'' rooms with pitch views would be ''in the clubs best interests''. It sends a shiver down my spine just to look at it. This horror show of a boardroom, at some point of ludicrucy, decided to build this piece of w##k and destroy an otherwise splendid stadium. A unique and stylish hotel it may be but what the f##k is it doing in our stand? A clear indication of our downward spiral imo which clearly shows where things went wrong at the club. Rant over. Thanks for listening.

 

[/quote]Once again, why let facts get in the way of a damn good moan.1) The club received revenue for leasing the land for the hotel to be built - they did not build it.Are you saying we should have turned down this revenue?2) Building a new stand would cost somewhere in the region of about £2m+Are you suggesting the club should borrow to build this stand or should it come from the playing budget?I do agree though that the hotel looks unsitely.

[John Boubepo 0]

Yep, it certainly does matter, without doubt it was the worst, amongst many mistakes the board have made - poor managers come and go but that hideous eyesore of a hotel will be here forever, totally ruining a potentially good stadium.I used to be quite proud of CR but it looks ridiculous in the extreme!

[Desert Fox 0]

RTF,

1. What revenue. Are you sure that this is not going to be receieved at some pint in the future when the hotel or if the hotel is sold? Are you sure that the club has incurred no transaction costs in structuring this deal? Are the returns from the hotel sufficient to compensate for the loss of planning flexibility?

2. I would love to know what kind of cost benefit analysis the club undertook re comparing the hotel against an corner in fill stand. At the time, structured debt would have been freely available to finance this on a securitised basis and with a season ticket waiting list (at the time of the decision) I would have thought that additional ground capacity would produce higher returns over the medium term as the hotel is simply not much of a money earner.

Anyway my point about off the pitch activities is far wider than the hotel and is mainly concerned with our distarous foray in residential property development.

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

 short of putting them in the stocks in the centre-circle and stoneing

[/quote]

Is that your idea for entertainment on a matchday?

LOL!

[? 20]

Or perhaps, on the other side of the argument, the boards ''obsession'' with off the pitch activities is what''s keeping us afloat, financially? That''s not my personal opinion, just a potential argument, y''know. Personally, i really can''t be bothered to do the necessary research into the matter to form an opinion either way, which seems to put me in the minority. Most people also don''t seem bothered to do any research into the matter (judging from the guess work and speculation on this thread), but somehow manage to come to an opinion regardless, and then proceed to spout it a whole lot, despite it not being backed up by facts. But then, that''s the Pinkun way.

Also, am i the only one thinking that you doomsayers are sort of scraping the bottom of the barrel here? I mean, this thing was built years ago! Keep up, lads. Whatever next, ''Chase Out'' protests?

As for the guy who labelled the hotel a ''hideous eyesore'' which makes Carrow Road look ''ridiculous in the extreme'', well, i can only assume you don''t travel away much. Hotel or no hotel, Carrow Road is still one of the better grounds in this league, both in terms of quality and character. The hotel has changed nothing.

[Desert Fox 0]

?

The problem with ''potential arguments'' as you put is that this is great in theory, but none of the posters that support the board can present a plausible argument beyond Delia and co being well intentioned. Whats this comes down to is ''research'' and there has been plenty of this posted over the last year. A ''lack of research'' does not mean that those that support the Board are correct. I appreciate that you are not syaing this is your opinion, but our Board have screwed up over a number of years and we are all going to pay the price for it.

[? 20]

Fair points, except the last, which we''ll have to agree to disagree on! ;o) Stayin'' up, up up!

However, i may not have many posts, but i''ve been reading this forum quite obsessively since i joined up, and for a time beforehand, and i have to say i''ve not seen a whole lot of proper research and debate. Sure, there''s some, and credit to those that go to the trouble and effort to find it, but it is nonetheless vastly outweighed by people jumping to conclusions and pulling an opinion from where the sun doesn''t shine without actually thinking about it and taking the facts into consideration first. Pick just about any post on here at random, and you''ll find evidence of that.

This hotel debate strikes me as predominately falling under that latter category. How many of the posters on here can back up the claim that the hotel has detracted from our on the field performance? Maybe i''m just missing something, but it certainly strikes me that, thus far in this thread, there''s nothing whatsoever to prove that claim. It''s rather, and unfortunately, typical of this forum.

And of course there''s been mistakes made. Huge mistakes. We wouldn''t be in the position we find ourselves in if there hadn''t been. But just because the board have got certain decisions wrong in the past doesn''t necessarily mean that every decision they''ve taken has been incorrect.

Until i see evidence to support the theory that any particular decision has worked out as an incorrect one, it strikes me as being desperately unfair, and wrong, to suggest that said decision is wrong, that''s all.

[Syteanric 1]

[quote user="jbghost"]

Getting away from the argument of the merits of the hotel it just didn''t make any sense to build a corner infill.

1. An access large enough for vehicles would have to be incorporated into the design which would have taken out most of the lower tier.

2. As already posted you would need segregation between home and away fans.

Effectively you would have been lucky to get 1,000 seats.

3. We do not need more seats. We can''t sell out the seats we already have. We may be getting around 24,000 each game but we do not sell out.

The club have stated taht they could build the 2nd tier on the City Stand for not much more than the cost of a corner infill and that would give you a hell of a lot more seats.

[/quote]

dont agree... so we need access "big enough for emergency vehicles" if anyone has been to any of the indetikit stadiums built in the last 10 years then this will disprove this...

as for segregation.. its only a peice of netting and a line of stewards separating away fans from home fans in the jarrold... this would apply the same in an infill....

jas :)

[Blofield Canary 11]

[quote user="jas the barclay king"][quote user="jbghost"]

Getting away from the argument of the merits of the hotel it just didn''t make any sense to build a corner infill.

1. An access large enough for vehicles would have to be incorporated into the design which would have taken out most of the lower tier.

2. As already posted you would need segregation between home and away fans.

Effectively you would have been lucky to get 1,000 seats.

3. We do not need more seats. We can''t sell out the seats we already have. We may be getting around 24,000 each game but we do not sell out.

The club have stated taht they could build the 2nd tier on the City Stand for not much more than the cost of a corner infill and that would give you a hell of a lot more seats.

[/quote]

dont agree... so we need access "big enough for emergency vehicles" if anyone has been to any of the indetikit stadiums built in the last 10 years then this will disprove this...

as for segregation.. its only a peice of netting and a line of stewards separating away fans from home fans in the jarrold... this would apply the same in an infill....

jas :)

[/quote]

The existing Corner Infill holds 1708 fans. Even with a very small access you couldn''t get away with less than losing 200 seats. Assume no segregation and at best you have 1500 seats available. Cost of the existing corner was somewhere over £2 million so work out the economics yourself.  £1333 per seat which would take around 100 games to get the money back without considering any interest on the loan to build it in the first place. In the last 2 seasons there have been less than 5 games where we have sold out which gives you a 20 year payback.

Hard economics on the project  - we got £1 million up front instead of spending £2 million on seats we would never use.  Considering most of the people on here arguing about the merits of hotel v seats are the same people complaining about the club wasting money on buildings and not players their argument does not stack up.

All of us would rather have seen an infill instead of the hotel but this is one case where the club quite clearly made the right decision.

[Blofield Canary 11]

and your bit of netting and a line of Stewards in the Jarrold take up 480 seats.

[Houston Canary 0]

.....and the stewards are not volunteers, are they?  So  that costs money, too.

[Thecanaryfan 0]

[quote user="Rethinking the future"][quote user="TheCanaryFan"]

The Holiday Inn Hotel Carrow Road is an absolute monstrosity. A pefect example of how to ruin a perfectly good football club with corporate greed and ill judged financial control. A potential corner fill stand would have cost a quater of the price and potentially boosted the ground attendance by 3,500 but instead the board decided that 50 ''executive'' rooms with pitch views would be ''in the clubs best interests''. It sends a shiver down my spine just to look at it. This horror show of a boardroom, at some point of ludicrucy, decided to build this piece of w##k and destroy an otherwise splendid stadium. A unique and stylish hotel it may be but what the f##k is it doing in our stand? A clear indication of our downward spiral imo which clearly shows where things went wrong at the club. Rant over. Thanks for listening.

 

[/quote]

Once again, why let facts get in the way of a damn good moan.

1) The club received revenue for leasing the land for the hotel to be built - they did not build it.
Are you saying we should have turned down this revenue?

2) Building a new stand would cost somewhere in the region of about £2m+
Are you suggesting the club should borrow to build this stand or should it come from the playing budget?

I do agree though that the hotel looks unsitely.
[/quote]

1) Yes. If we can turn down Cullums £20m we can certainly turn down a hotel. Especially one that doubles as a stand.

2) Why not? All other off field persuits have eaten into our player budget. However I think our situation has somewhat changed since the hotel was built so Im afraid its been left too late.

[Thecanaryfan 0]

[quote user="question mark"]

The hotel has changed nothing.

[/quote]

My god, I dont believe I just read that.......

[Bury Yellow 2]

Nigel, I have no intention of getting into slanging matches about brain speed of Norfolk people or anyone else for that matter and I can''t understand why you have mentioned this.

I was born in Norfolk and lived there for 14 years. All my mothers side of the family are Norfolk and proud of it.

I did not support the board regarding the hotel but those who did probably didn''t think it would look like it does from the inside of the ground. As I have already stated I do not think this got approval from all the board members.

Why don''t you have an opinion on this eyesore Nigel?

The ''Wynnie'' term seems to have been developed on this board to easily describe those who appear to support the board without any concession that they could just have been wrong on many important issues.

Wynnies or Jessies, no supporter of this club deserves relegation as we all feel passionate about our club. I will be delighted when a situation arises when the majority shareholders go, taking Mr Doncaster with them.

[Thecanaryfan 0]

[quote user="Houston Canary"].....and the stewards are not volunteers, are they?  So  that costs money, too.[/quote]

 

The cost of one ticket will pay a steward for the day. Quite insignificant really.

[Paul 0]

Why any Norwich fan would want a pitch view is beyond me. It''s not as if we don''t see enough of it anyway. 23 games a season is more than enough for me.

Would rather spend my money on business class return flights to Canada in June instead.

[JJ 0]

Regardless of whether it makes any money or not, from an architectural point of view, I think it looks bloody awful.  I''ve never liked it because it destroys the symmetry of the stands and its the first thing you see as you approach the stadium from the Barclay side by road, train or foot.  Its badly thought out and looks an eyesore.

I know other clubs have done the same, but that doesn''t mean its right.

 

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

If you didnt like the design did you let the Norwich city Council Planning Applications Committee  know? 

[Green and Yellow 0]

It will forever remain as a monument to pis* head Delia and that other banker plonkcaster.

[Appletonandy 0]

I remember going to a meeting (it was the year when we were in the Premier League) at which Neil Doncaster stated that the long-term plan for the ground was to build a second tier on the City Stand as this would provide enough seats to meet demand.  However, the only way this could be funded was if we could stay in the Premier League.

If you can picture it, I think this would make the ground look ''complete''.  Obviously it''s just a dream now but that was the intention as I understood it.

[Theres only one Ken Foggo 0]

I agree about this monstrosity - it is completely out of keeping with the rest of the ground and has no architectural merit whatsoever.