where's the missin' eight farzin gorn, guv ?

[Juggy 0]

[quote user="ricardo"][quote user="The New Boy Le Juge"][quote] You obviously assume continued Premier status is a given. [/quote]

Nope, I don''t, although I do believe that the new parachute payment deal is much more attractive than the one that we benefited from upon our last relegation to the Championship and that''s why Wigan haven''t had to decimate their squad. The risk of administration upon relegation is lower now for relatively well managed clubs than it was even a few years ago. 

[quote]  Any sort of redevelopment that would require the replacement of the City Stand is going to require a large amount of cash that can only come from our Sky TV payment or from a loan. Logically it''s going to be a loan because anything else would jeopardize team strengthening.[/quote]

One would assume that a figure of "up to £30m" is one derived from financial projections which include interest repayments over fixed period of time, which would hypothetically give us a true cost of £3m per year for ten years and even less over twenty years. A relatively small amount of money. 

[quote] Yes, we would all like to see a bigger stadium but it looks unlikely that anything that is remotely financially viable is not logistically possible. [/quote]

Even in the case of a full 7000 seat expansion, at the worst case cost of £30m, we would only need to fill 3000 of those seats with adult season ticket holders or 2000 adult casual ticket per game to achieve an annual ROI of over 5% before taking into consideration other revenue such as catering/beer, club shop expenditure, income from the inevitable new corporate hospitality (the City stand doesn''t have boxes, a new one would), additional sponsorship boards (double tier, a row in the middle to be exploited, right in front of the TV cameras), and the potential commercial areas which could be incorporated into the design (a new Norwich City megastore perhaps? A large bar for pre and post match beverages?). 

Sometimes a much increased away allocation would fill 1000+ more seats alone. I can''t see why an annual yield of 8% is unachievable even with lots of empty seats and that''s a very conservative estimate. That is a strong yield, how much more should one expect from a property investment? That''s more than you can expect from buying a terrace house in Norwich and renting it out. Same principle applies. Can''t see why the development couldn''t pay for itself over a ten year period, possibly even less. Then there is price inflation. The interest rate on the debt might fluctuate a little, but the cost of the football experience will no doubt continue to increase substantially above any increase in the rate of inflation. So will the cost of building though, the sooner we do it the cheaper it would be. 

[quote]  Apart from perhaps something small in front of the hotel. I think putting in extra seats and extra rows have gone about as far as is possible to go.[/quote]

But you appear to have reached this conclusion based on nothing other than a figure of £30m and a rough estimate of how many additional people you believe would attend games. I find it amazing that you can claim ''non-financial viability'' with nothing other than a few figures plucked from the air. We don''t even know if the cost of £30m is the fully-financed cost including interest or the amount to be borrowed pre-interest. If it were a fixed rate cost of £30m over ten years then that is cheap and we could easily achieve a yield which would justify that investment. 

[quote] We could argue all day about how many extra seats are required but my position remains that we would not be able to fill a 35k stadium on a regular basis. [/quote]

Well I agree (in the short term) but at no stage has anybody said that extending by 7000 is our only option, could we extend by just 4000? If so at what cost? And how can you so confidently state that expansion is not financially viable until you know how much this would cost? You can''t, so stop pretending that you can. 

[quote]  If you want to believe that there will be a major stadium expansion in the next 2-3 years then I''m not going to stop you. [/quote]

I think you may have misunderstood. I said that McNally has ruled out expansion within the next 2-3 years, at no point did I state that I believe there would be expansion in the next 2-3 years. 

[quote]  What McNally said was no different to what he said 3 years ago. I didn''t believe it would happen then and I don''t believe it will happen now. [/quote]

Well we will see. There are always stadium naming rights to be sold..... 

[/quote]I''m not trying to crush your dream but you need to ask yourself why if it''s such a no brainer, are the club not getting straight on with the job.I simply ask you to look at the history of the gates over time and honestly tell me that a 35k stadium can be filled on a regular basis. Even allowing for an increased population I contend that the figures say that it can''t and without Premiership status assured long term it is nothing more than a vanity project.[/quote]

My point here Ricardo is and has been that neither of us know whether it is 27k or 35k with no in between, or whether a smaller development to 32k or similar is possible.

I''d probably see 35k as too much too soon, but 32k in my opinion would be much more realistic dependent on cost and depending on whether a 32k development could be undertaken. 

If there is any question that I''d have for McNally it would be to clarify whether 35k would be achieved in phases and whether it would be possible to do phase one before holding out on phase two. 

I doubt either of us know the answer to that question, and for that reason alone I think a 27k v 35k argument or a £0k v £30m argument is not one worthy of debate. What if it were 32000 and £15m? What then? 

All we know is "up to 35000" and "up to £30m" - I''d quite like to know how much it would cost to undertake a more modest development which would allow us to double the away allocation where appropriate, eradicate the season ticket waiting list, and leave the potential for some subsidised tickets to be provided to kids at appropriate times to ensure that we breed the next generation of Norwich fans.

And I think 32000 would be enough to achieve that. You can see short term pain, but I can see long term gain. 

[norfolkbroadslim 223]

Of course the fans all left in their droves when we were relegated to League One, didn''t they???[:^)]

 

 

Sell Ruddy for £15m in the summer and there is a huge wedge of it!  If this happens it would definitely be a viable option as the amount we would need to borrow would not be anywhere near as vast.

 

Keepers in general are not expensive and a replacement for Ruddy could easily come out of that year''s transfer budget.

[Doctorsleep 0]

If I had known that was your case City 1st I am sorry but I would not have bothered to read it. Rude and shallow!

[ricardo 7,339]

I don''t know what the figure is but off the top of my head I would think that if we presently had the capacity we could average 30k, maybe a bit more. The thing is that any expansion needs to be aimed at the future and not just now. Unfortunately we don''t know what league we are going to be in next year let alone 10-20 years time. The difference between going for 35k as opposed to 32k is probably not all that great. In any event somewhere between £25 and £30 million would have to be borrowed. We had a big debt dragging us down for years. I personally would not like to go through all that again.You only have to look down the road at 1p5wich to see a club that expanded their ground in the good times but can now barely fill half of it. I know people will throw their arms in the air but I contend that having seen NCFC nearly go bust twice, we have no divine right to think the status quo will remain as it is.It''s a difficult choice for McNally and Bowkett, I''m sure they would like to push on with expansion but I think both are financially astute enough to realise it''s not going to be as straightforward as many now think.

[RvWs 4 year contract 0]

[quote user="The New Boy"]Of course we could fill 31250 seats, pretty regularly. Circa 1500 people waiting for a season ticket. 

We already get circa 26500 people. That''s 28000 already.

Half the teams in this league would be capable of bringing 1500 additional away fans, that''s 29500 when playing a big club or a London team. 

That''s 1750 casual tickets which would fly if they weren''t stuck behind a post and priced at £35 or £40 + cheap kids tickets. 

Can''t see what any Norwich fan would have against flogging kids tickets for a fiver when the away team can''t take a 3000 seat allocation - those £5 tickets would create a new generation of season ticket holders, and that''s precisely why we fill Carrow Road now after filling it with kids a decade ago.

Those kids are now adults. 

Most of the people who moan about expansion sit in the City Stand. They don''t want the capacity increased because:

1). They can''t see how pathetic the City Stand looks, the rest of the ground can.

2). They don''t want to lose their seats and couldn''t care less about getting more kids in the ground because they probably won''t be alive / physically capable of attending games by the time those kids turn into season ticket holders in 15 years. 

Sorry but it''s true.... the majority of those against expansion just don''t want the upheaval - they are against it for selfish reasons. Look at the fuss that most of them made when asked to move a couple of rows to accommodate some nice shiny dugouts when we got promoted. Imagine what they would be like if asked to move to another stand. 

[/quote]I think this is rubbish. McNally has been quoted as saying "all spare money goes into the football budget" which i fully believe is the best attitude to have.

[ricardo 7,339]

[quote user="norfolkbroadslim"]

Of course the fans all left in their droves when we were relegated to League One, didn''t they???[:^)]

 

 

Sell Ruddy for £15m in the summer and there is a huge wedge of it!  If this happens it would definitely be a viable option as the amount we would need to borrow would not be anywhere near as vast.

 

Keepers in general are not expensive and a replacement for Ruddy could easily come out of that year''s transfer budget.

[/quote]Just look at the history of the gates Slim. Yes, only a few drifted away when we were relegated but fortunately we bounced back. Have a look at what happened when we were relegated in 95 and spent 9 years in limbo land. Tell me in all honesty that you believe gates can never go down again.

[Scooby 0]

"If you build it, they will come" 😊

[ricardo 7,339]

[quote user="Scooby"]"If you build it, they will come" 😊[/quote]That''s what the red faced buffoon at Poorman Rd thought.That turned out well[N]

[Juggy 0]

[quote] Are you from suffolk by any chance as you don''t sound too bright [/quote] 

How many times have you pulled that one out? Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[quote] You squeak about paying £45 for a reduced view ticket, conveniently ignoring that the Chelsea game (a whole fortnight ahead) is already sold out. Where the problem with the view there ? [/quote] 

And you said that I''m not too bright? How many Chelsea fans do you think there are in Norfolk? And how many of those Chelsea fans have had the misfortune to have been stuck behind a post at Carrow Road? 

[quote]  You then compound your stupidity (if that is possible() by claiming that I presume that "that ticket prices would remain as high". I do not. The point I made was about the cost of the subsidy ie it would only be if £1.5m on the presumption that ticket prices remain as they are and ALL seats are sold. Try reading the post. [/quote] 

What "subsidy", a new stand would pay for itself in ten years. £1.5m is chicken feed. 

[quote]   Of course the ticket prices would have to drop to stimulate demand. THAT IS THE WHOLE POINT! [/quote] 

Yes that is the point City1st. It would be great to see football become more affordable to families so that the minors within those families could experience and fall in love with the Carrow Road experience and become lifetime fans and future adult season ticket holders. Many or most of the fans on this forum would have started going to Carrow Road one subsidised concessionary tickets at a time when seats were readily available, and now they pay adult prices for season tickets or casual tickets. You are probably one of them. If so count yourself lucky that your father could easily obtain affordable tickets to take you to games. It is not easy or affordable to take a child to a game on a casual ticket these days, especially as it is very difficult to find two seats close together, and that could be losing us the next generation of fans who may as well support Man Utd if local live football isn''t easily accessible. I''m only wishing for them the luxury which was afforded to me, probably you, and probably most of the adults on this forum during their childhood, and it is for the good of our club that this situation is rectified. I''ve attempted to put across my point of view without resorting to abuse and simple minded insults, you should try it some time. Not many people would get away with communicating in the manner that you do on this forum - only a select few. 

[quote] Something that Indy heroically fails to grasp. We could probably sellout a £40,000 capacity ground if the tickets were low enough. [/quote]

Interesting concept, would the currency be in coins or notes?   

[quote] But it would mean quite a few more million from the playing budget to subsidise the cost. [/quote]

The value of RVW''s four year contract + transfer fee + signing on fee is probably somewhere in the region of £18m, so fine, a few million to ensure the next generation of fans and the long term health of our club suits me. 

[quote]  So there would be no seats at £35 in the new City stand, as that would mean all casual tickets elsewhere having to drop BELOW that price which would simply mean a far far lower over all ticket income ie the cost of this would be even more. Way beyond the hoped for £1.5m loss. [/quote] 

I never said you would have to drop prices in the City Stand, it would only require us to offer cheaper tickets somewhere in the ground, and that could be achieved by reducing the number of available season tickets in the Riverend and Barclay - with the number of season tickets in the City Stand increased. Then offering competitive casual prices, particularly for families, in Riverend and Barclay. 

[quote]  The previous squeaks about extending the capacity have been from the happy clappy/fairweather/johhny come latelies who have claimed that we would easily sellout another 4000 seats if not 8000 more. [/quote] 

I think we would too. Clearly you don''t travel away much City1st, because if you did then you would know that we could double the away section for a start. We get moaned about by other clubs for not offering enough tickets. 

[quote]  Despite all evidence to the contrary their squeaks continued. [/quote] 

Despite absolutely no evidence to the contrary other than your hunch. Which is worth no more or no less than my hunch or the hunch of anybody else in the mind of anybody else other than yourself, because your opinion is the only one worth anything to yourself - a typical trait in your typical despicable and arrogant old man. 

[quote]   Maybe just maybe the reality of the situation might now finally sink in. [/quote] 

The reality is that you old fogies have no desire to think too much about the future because they have to face the fact that they don''t have much time left, whilst us younger lot are able to look 15 to 20 years in the future and are more open minded when it comes to change because we will still be around to see the results of that change. 

[quote]  And a few of the dimwits [/quote] 

Well done City1st, you have reached factor 8 on your insultometer today, highest score for at least a week. 

[quote]  the club who are number crunching the figures on a daily hourly or whatever basis came to that conclusion years back. [/quote] 

Or maybe, just maybe, McNally is telling the truth when he says that the club "need" to expand the stadium. 

[quote]  Shame a few of the not too bright are unable to understand that fact. [/quote]

Telling people that they are not bright does not make you look bright yourself. You seldom have any substance to your arguments, or anything interesting to add, pretty much all you are capable of doing is being abusive to anybody who disagrees with you and that itself actually appears to suggest a lack of mental capacity. 

[Doctorsleep 0]

I''m not sure if City 1st has an unfortunate manner or if he is just an unfortunate.

[ricardo 7,339]

[quote user="Doctorsleep"]I''m not sure if City 1st has an unfortunate manner or if he is just an unfortunate.[/quote]I think we need to don our tin hats doctor. This is just starting to get a bit messy[6]

[Doctorsleep 0]

Overstepping the mark as a new poster isn''t too good.

But that chap, really!

[ricardo 7,339]

[quote user="Doctorsleep"]Overstepping the mark as a new poster isn''t too good.

But that chap, really![/quote]Bark worse than his bite, don''t let it put you off posting.Always good to hear different views although some get a bit passionate about things.[;)]

[nutty nigel 7,509]

"If we''re playing good football"

 

Substitute that for if we''re winning football matches. This "good football" is a red herring. Historically the crowds turn up when we''re winning. We''d probably have more chance of a regular 35,000 winning games in the Champs. Although I will concede we''d fill it everytime ManUtd or Chelsea came even if we hadn''t won for months.

 

 

[Juggy 0]

[quote user="ricardo"]I don''t know what the figure is but off the top of my head I would think that if we presently had the capacity we could average 30k, maybe a bit more. The thing is that any expansion needs to be aimed at the future and not just now. Unfortunately we don''t know what league we are going to be in next year let alone 10-20 years time. The difference between going for 35k as opposed to 32k is probably not all that great. In any event somewhere between £25 and £30 million would have to be borrowed. We had a big debt dragging us down for years. I personally would not like to go through all that again.You only have to look down the road at 1p5wich to see a club that expanded their ground in the good times but can now barely fill half of it. I know people will throw their arms in the air but I contend that having seen NCFC nearly go bust twice, we have no divine right to think the status quo will remain as it is.It''s a difficult choice for McNally and Bowkett, I''m sure they would like to push on with expansion but I think both are financially astute enough to realise it''s not going to be as straightforward as many now think.[/quote]

I would personally prefer 32000 to 35000 even if the cost isn''t substantially different, perhaps with a 32000 being developed in such a way to allow easy/affordable future expansion. Because although I''d like to see us ensuring our future fan base by making it cheaper and easier for parents to take kids on a casual basis (my primary reasoning, this must be the first generation not to have easily accessible local professional football), and would like to see the away allocation increased when the demand is there (a good way of improving the atmosphere at the morgue)..... I would hate to see 6000 empty seats against Stoke at home. 

So for that reason 32000 would be preferable to me, large areas of empty seats are an atmosphere killer. A couple of thousand in a 32000 seater wouldn''t be so bad. So I at least half agree with you Ricardo, 35000 is far too much too soon irrespective of our long term potential. At least 32000 could be filled half a dozen times within the first season of opening. 

[ricardo 7,339]

[quote user="Canarygirl"]I posted that before I read your latest post.

Its surely about how succesfull we are aiming to be isnt it.

I believe we are aiming to be a success in the Prem, I would hope that the Club feel the same way and have confidence that its acheivable.[/quote]I am sure they do and everybody wants to be successful although at the end of the season 3 clubs are relegated. I''ve seen 6 relegations since I''ve been a supporter and as sure as eggs are eggs there will be a 7th waiting somewhere down the line (hopefully far off).My concern is being saddled with debt again. It nearly put the club out of business once before, lets not go there again.

[ricardo 7,339]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

"If we''re playing good football"

 

Substitute that for if we''re winning football matches. This "good football" is a red herring. Historically the crowds turn up when we''re winning. We''d probably have more chance of a regular 35,000 winning games in the Champs. Although I will concede we''d fill it everytime ManUtd or Chelsea came even if we hadn''t won for months.

 

 

[/quote]Tell them about the decades of dross and 13k gates Nigel. They don''t seem to believe me.

[ricardo 7,339]

[quote user="The New Boy Le Juge"][quote user="ricardo"]I don''t know what the figure is but off the top of my head I would think that if we presently had the capacity we could average 30k, maybe a bit more. The thing is that any expansion needs to be aimed at the future and not just now. Unfortunately we don''t know what league we are going to be in next year let alone 10-20 years time. The difference between going for 35k as opposed to 32k is probably not all that great. In any event somewhere between £25 and £30 million would have to be borrowed. We had a big debt dragging us down for years. I personally would not like to go through all that again.You only have to look down the road at 1p5wich to see a club that expanded their ground in the good times but can now barely fill half of it. I know people will throw their arms in the air but I contend that having seen NCFC nearly go bust twice, we have no divine right to think the status quo will remain as it is.It''s a difficult choice for McNally and Bowkett, I''m sure they would like to push on with expansion but I think both are financially astute enough to realise it''s not going to be as straightforward as many now think.[/quote]

I would personally prefer 32000 to 35000 even if the cost isn''t substantially different, perhaps with a 32000 being developed in such a way to allow easy/affordable future expansion. Because although I''d like to see us ensuring our future fan base by making it cheaper and easier for parents to take kids on a casual basis (my primary reasoning, this must be the first generation not to have easily accessible local professional football), and would like to see the away allocation increased when the demand is there (a good way of improving the atmosphere at the morgue)..... I would hate to see 6000 empty seats against Stoke at home. 

So for that reason 32000 would be preferable to me, large areas of empty seats are an atmosphere killer. A couple of thousand in a 32000 seater wouldn''t be so bad. So I at least half agree with you Ricardo, 35000 is far too much too soon irrespective of our long term potential. At least 32000 could be filled half a dozen times within the first season of opening. 

[/quote]Yes I think we can finally agree on that. Nothing would please me more than to see regular gates over 30k with enough seats to introduce young kids to the game.I was very fortunate when I started, the only time you needed a ticket was for sell out FA cup games. You just turned up and paid your sixpence at the gate (two and a half new pence)[:D][Y]

[norfolkbroadslim 223]

No I don''t believe that the gates can never go down again.  However, look at the average gates across the leagues as a whole back then.

 

The issue with increasing capacity is not just the possibility of having ''x'' number of seats that we cannot sell.  The main issue is is the debt incurred by increasing capacity.  If someone came along and donated the full cost of rebuilding the stand and thus increasing the capacity, it would not matter one jot if for some games we had 1k, 2k, 3k or 4k empty seats for a game.

 

The issue arises where we have a debt to service and we aren''t getting enough additional income from the extra seats to service the debt.

 

Now, the chances of a mega-rich benefactor dropping out of the sky and funding the cost of a new stand are slim in the extreme.  What other options are there? 

 

- Taking money from the playing budget

 

- Sponsorship, naming of the stand

 

- Profit on player sales

 

- Additional revenue streams (established purely to fund the new stand)

 

- Sale of shares

 

- A combination of the above

 

I was not for one minute suggesting that we should just go out and sell Ruddy.  I think he is an excellent keeper who will be very, very difficult to replace.  But if he did move on for mega money then some of this could be put in a ''kitty'' so to speak to go towards funding a new stand.  Likewise the same could happen for other player sales and also if, but only if, at the end of a season we did not fully spend all of the transfer budget for that season we could add money to ''the kitty''.

 

Yes, I suppose, technically, doing the above is taking money from the playing budget (money that could have been spent on players).  However, given another 2 or 3 years maybe, will be the time when the squad will probably be as strong as it can be, given that we remain in the Premiership.  What I am saying is we would not need to do as much strengthening as we had done the previous 5 or so years. 

 

What if we got relegated?  Well, ''the kitty'' would be there should we need it for other reasons.

 

So would we save all the money or some before building a new stand?  That''s a difficult question to answer and is something that would be constantly monitored.  Whether it was half the money, two thirds, three quarters or whatever, with the rest being a loan, the pros and cons of which would have to be assessed.

 

Failing the above, I cannot think of any other possibility of us realistically building a new stand in the foreseeable future and the only time we will (some of us will) see one is when one of the current stands is deemed not safe, regulations say we have to, or where the upkeep of a current stand is deemed not to be cost effective.  However many years into the distant future that may be?[:^)]

[Juggy 0]

[quote user="ricardo"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

"If we''re playing good football"

Substitute that for if we''re winning football matches. This "good football" is a red herring. Historically the crowds turn up when we''re winning. We''d probably have more chance of a regular 35,000 winning games in the Champs. Although I will concede we''d fill it everytime ManUtd or Chelsea came even if we hadn''t won for months.

[/quote]Tell them about the decades of dross and 13k gates Nigel. They don''t seem to believe me.[/quote]

Man Utd only averaged 40000 in the 1990''s. 

Our attendances have been consistent enough to suggest real growth over the past decade, we are a growing club, in a city and county with a fast growing population.

2012-13: 26,672 (Premier League)

2011-12: 26,606 (Premier League)

2010–11: 25,386^[52] (Football League Championship)

2009–10: 24,755^[52] (Football League One)

2008–09: 24,542^[52] (Football League Championship)

2007–08: 24,527^[53] (Football League Championship)

2006–07: 24,544^[54] (Football League Championship)

2005–06: 24,833^[55] (Football League Championship)

2004–05: 24,350^[56] (Premier League)

[Juggy 0]

[quote user="ricardo"][quote user="The New Boy Le Juge"][quote user="ricardo"]I don''t know what the figure is but off the top of my head I would think that if we presently had the capacity we could average 30k, maybe a bit more. The thing is that any expansion needs to be aimed at the future and not just now. Unfortunately we don''t know what league we are going to be in next year let alone 10-20 years time. The difference between going for 35k as opposed to 32k is probably not all that great. In any event somewhere between £25 and £30 million would have to be borrowed. We had a big debt dragging us down for years. I personally would not like to go through all that again.

You only have to look down the road at 1p5wich to see a club that expanded their ground in the good times but can now barely fill half of it. I know people will throw their arms in the air but I contend that having seen NCFC nearly go bust twice, we have no divine right to think the status quo will remain as it is.It''s a difficult choice for McNally and Bowkett, I''m sure they would like to push on with expansion but I think both are financially astute enough to realise it''s not going to be as straightforward as many now think.[/quote]

I would personally prefer 32000 to 35000 even if the cost isn''t substantially different, perhaps with a 32000 being developed in such a way to allow easy/affordable future expansion. Because although I''d like to see us ensuring our future fan base by making it cheaper and easier for parents to take kids on a casual basis (my primary reasoning, this must be the first generation not to have easily accessible local professional football), and would like to see the away allocation increased when the demand is there (a good way of improving the atmosphere at the morgue)..... I would hate to see 6000 empty seats against Stoke at home. 

So for that reason 32000 would be preferable to me, large areas of empty seats are an atmosphere killer. A couple of thousand in a 32000 seater wouldn''t be so bad. So I at least half agree with you Ricardo, 35000 is far too much too soon irrespective of our long term potential. At least 32000 could be filled half a dozen times within the first season of opening. 

[/quote]Yes I think we can finally agree on that. Nothing would please me more than to see regular gates over 30k with enough seats to introduce young kids to the game.I was very fortunate when I started, the only time you needed a ticket was for sell out FA cup games. You just turned up and paid your sixpence at the gate (two and a half new pence)[:D][Y][/quote]

It has only been the last four or five years where the situation has become critical, my fear is for a lost generation. My first experiences of football came in 1990 to 1992, and even then you could pay at the gate. Then I had kids season tickets - as cheap as chips in the Riverend, cost next to nothing. 

Now season tickets for kids remain affordable, but there is a long waiting list, so that just tells me that we need to clear that waiting list so that kids can attend games. That is honestly my only real concern, that in fifteen years all the 25 year olds are going to be Man Utd supporters or following a different sport. 

The current 25 year olds add to this increased demand, and many of those would have been brought up on cheap season tickets. In the short term they may not bring the club much money, but in the long term they do. A kid might have a £70 season ticket for 8 years, and then a £500 season ticket for 40 or 50 years. That''s why I believe increasing the capacity would prove a wise decision for the long term health of the club.

But to fill a 35000 seater we would have to do that bloody kids for a quid thing where they all blow those stupid horns and give everybody a headache, and I''m not supporting that.... I''m talking more about dads taking their son to the footy, rather than filling the stands with school trips, so 32000 would do me just fine. 

[Mr Jenkins 0]

"We are a growing club in a city and county with a fast growing population"

That is the point I am making, hisory is always something you have to give real consideration to, so many times the same mistakes happen over and over again, BUT, things are changing so quickly, particulary in this county, the dualling of the A 11 is making Norwich more accesible to Cambridge, North Essex etc, and the County is looking at large scale growth in business and housing, our potential pool of spectators in the future has to be a lot more than any historical figures. Its about more than just history!

[nutty nigel 7,509]

Correct Juge. But the reasonh our gates are so consistently high is because people like me can buy a season ticket on interest free monthly terms. This keeps the ground full. Now the question is whether there are enough new season ticket holders for an increased capacity stadium. because if the answer is no or if you think these new seats should be for casual fans then the following is what I believe will happen : The club will have to reduce tickets and use special offers to fill the ground. ST holders will be resentful deciding not to renew unless they''re the real die hards who go every week. For the unnatractive fixtures (Stoke, Sunderland etc) attendances will drop below 20,000 while the Man Us and Chelseas still sell out. Only if we''re winning will those fixtures against the likes of Stoke become attractive. It won''t matter if we''re playing like Barca otherwise!!

 

 

[Juggy 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

Correct Juge. But the reasonh our gates are so consistently high is because people like me can buy a season ticket on interest free monthly terms. This keeps the ground full. Now the question is whether there are enough new season ticket holders for an increased capacity stadium. because if the answer is no or if you think these new seats should be for casual fans then the following is what I believe will happen : The club will have to reduce tickets and use special offers to fill the ground. ST holders will be resentful deciding not to renew unless they''re the real die hards who go every week. For the unnatractive fixtures (Stoke, Sunderland etc) attendances will drop below 20,000 while the Man Us and Chelseas still sell out. Only if we''re winning will those fixtures against the likes of Stoke become attractive. It won''t matter if we''re playing like Barca otherwise!!

[/quote]

Well my personal reasons for wanting to increase the stadium are to ensure that we can get the next generation hooked on the game. I do get your reasoning, some season ticket holders might not buy a season ticket if it were easy to buy casual tickets (in desirable parts of the ground). 

It''s a tricky one, but perhaps part of the solution would be to offer extremely cheap kids season tickets at one per full paying adult, but charge a fair bit for casual kids tickets. Therefore encouraging adults with kids to buy season tickets as it becomes cheaper for a family, whilst also ensuring that season ticket holders save a hell of a lot of money on the price of casual tickets. 

Those cheap kids season tickets should only be offered in the Riverend, Upper Barclay, and Wensum corner, maybe part of the Jarrold. There will still be a lot of adults who would wish to remain away from kids in the City stand, and it would still be really difficult to buy a Barclay or Snakepit casual icket. 

I actually think a lot of Jarrold Stand season ticket holders would want to migrate to the new large City Stand. Most other clubs have cheap areas and expensive areas and yet manage to mantain high prices in desirable parts of the ground. 

I think the club could be clever and manipulate availability of casual tickets and cheap kids tickets in parts of the ground to maintain exclusivity and high demand in certain areas of the ground - and in those areas I don''t think demand or price of season tickets would fall. 

At Old Trafford there are casual tickets for £30, and some season tickets go for £1000+. They do this because they create the illusion of inferior/superior tickets, and different parts of the ground have a different dynamic.

If the City Stand held 8000, same as the Jarrold, I could probably envisage the City Stand being highly desirable and the Jarrold Stand becoming a family stand of some sort. 

But by keeping casual prices high, season tickets very competitive, and simply offering huge incentives to take kids.... I think it could work out. Not with a 35000 seater though, only with a 32000 seater.

Also, the casual ticket availability could still be severely restricted at times if the club gave precedent to away allocation. So if Spurs wanted to bring 5000 the club should let them, reducing casual availability accordingly, and sending a message out that it is still necessary to buy a season ticket to guarantee a ticket or a ticket in your preferred part of the ground.

[nutty nigel 7,509]

 Dads and grandads will take their kids to cup games and the like anyway. It used to be reserve fixtures where the kids started off. The big drop off point is when kids move on to adult prices. We''d have more chance of setting up a generation of supporters in the chumps unfortunately. This PL football for tv with all the live streams and tv coverage just encourages young adults to the pubs or their puters I''m afraid [:(]

 

 

[Juggy 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

 Dads and grandads will take their kids to cup games and the like anyway. It used to be reserve fixtures where the kids started off. The big drop off point is when kids move on to adult prices. We''d have more chance of setting up a generation of supporters in the chumps unfortunately. This PL football for tv with all the live streams and tv coverage just encourages young adults to the pubs or their puters I''m afraid.

[/quote]

Perhaps that is another area where they could heavily subsidise season tickets then.... the 16 to 21 age group (half of them are on apprenticeships, unemployed or are students so are skint). They should also reduce ticket prices for OAP''s again.

I think if they did extend the ground they should keep casual tickets high / at a premium for all age groups, particularly as this is what the away fans pay and if we can increase away allocation then the London clubs and the likes of Man Utd and Liverpool can help subsidise our own young fans and old fans. 

I just like the idea of looking after the young and old, I think they are the fabric of the club. But there should always be a significant saving for season tickets, should never make casual tickets too attractive. No season ticket holder wants to subsidise a part-time casual fan who decided to leave the armchair for a day, but most would have no problem subsidising an 8 year old or a dear old granny, particular if the cheap tickets were concentrated in one part of the ground (Riverend basically). 

[nutty nigel 7,509]

Many people aged 18-21 have far more disposable income than many aged 30-40. Rather like when they abolished to 60-65 for that very reason.

 

Do you know people who struggle to get tickets now Juge?

 

 

[Juggy 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

Many people aged 18-21 have far more disposable income than many aged 30-40. Rather like when they abolished to 60-65 for that very reason.

Do you know people who struggle to get tickets now Juge?

[/quote]

I think I mentioned it before but I live a long way from Norwich at the moment. Well in the next town from me there is a Norwich fan that goes to Carrow Road four or five times a year and when he fancies it either I will drive him and he will sort the petrol, or he will drive me and I will pay the petrol. It''s nice to be able to have more than two beers.

Last season there were at least two possibly three games where he tried to buy a casual ticket and found only restricted view tickets available, sometimes almost a week before a game. If he''d have persevered and kept looking he probably would have found buy back tickets in other parts of the ground, but whenever he checked and found only restricted view corner stand tickets he actually wouldn''t bother.

So whilst it is generally possible to find a ticket with restricted view, and generally possible to find a ticket on buy back if you can check every few hours, I do know fans who simply wouldn''t consider paying full price for a restricted view and who actually get quite angry at being expected to pay full price for those seats. 

So when the attendance is down 300, and most of those seats are restricted view, I don''t necessarily think that this means there weren''t 300 people wanting a ticket - it is more the principle of it. Those seats should be at least £10 cheaper. 

There is also the issue of not being able to find two seats together, and that is an even bigger problem. That means that a casual can''t take a kid, or a girlfriend, or go with their dad or a mate and many people just don''t like sitting there alone. 

I agree that with a bit of perseverance it is usually easy enough to find a casual ticket on buy back for all but the most high profile of games (e.g. Man Utd or Liverpool), but it is extremely difficult to find two seats together for many games and if the possibility was there for people to buy two, three, four seats together then I think a lot of people would take that opportunity.

[Juggy 0]

"Many people aged 18-21 have far more disposable income than many aged 30-40"

People have been saying that for years but I''m not sure how true that is now, youth unemployment is over 20% and if you want to learn to drive at 18 then you are looking at £2000+ for your first car insurance premium. Many of those who aren''t unemployed go to uni and live off of £4000 a year in maintenance loans, and many of the rest are getting paid £2 an hour as apprentices. 

It was probably more likely the case when it was easy to get a job after school and an 18 year old could go and earn £250 a week in an office job whilst living with mum and dad - things are much tougher for kids now and that''s why nightclubs and bars are closing left, right and centre - because the kids aren''t going out either. 

[nutty nigel 7,509]

That''s not quite what I meant Juge but I get what you''re saying. Although if your 35,000 stadium is sold out like you imagine that guy who lives near you will have the same problems he has now. The only way to take his problems away would be if the stadium didn''t sell out.

 

I took both my kids when they were younger. Now they share a season ticket and I get one for the  two grandsons who take it in turns like their parents. I had to wait a couple of seasons for that ticket to applied when they were 6. So I''m doing my bit for the future generations and always have. [:)]

 

But once again I think the people who have most trouble getting good seats are the casual fans and that would be pretty much what you''d expect for many events that sell out. Not just Norwich City footbal matches.