Show us the money

With modern building technology, I suspect it would be possible to build a much better stand in the footprint of the Findus, wider, with more seats (and a better view if the posts were removed) and facilities better suited for corporate/office stuff. Same goes for the Main Stand, of course.

Other than the cost, the big issue is what to do with the fans while these things are being built. You can't build a stand in a couple of months so, at current levels of attendance, somebody would have to miss out for a while.

Quoted from aldi_01

I must be in the minority but I’m really not arsed about a new ground, certainly not one stuck out near flipping Great Coates with intercourse all around it.

The owners have been keen to stress the importance of building a community club, a stadium stuck on the edge of town does not say ‘community’. Again, we have people obsessing over increasing parking, surely, in 2023 we should be looking at getting fans and encouraging fans to get to a ground in other ways rather than just encouraging driving.

It seems like everyone went to Brighton, no massive car park there.

I’d imagine that many a discussion has taken place regarding a redevelopment of BP, and whilst some armchair experts seem to obsess over BP being knackered and seem to have some insider made up knowledge about safety certificates etc, I think there’s genuine suggestions probably being made about BP.

The previous owner wasted so much time and money on a Roy of the rovers drawing and seeking planning permission at sites that were beneficial to him that he ignored BP completely because of pig ignorance really. Had he given it a tad more TLC it wouldn’t be half as bad.

Also, if you live on say, Blundell Ave, if the pontoon suddenly doubled in height, I’m not sure that would have any negative effect on either your life or property, and it would be a modern looking building as opposed to what exists now.

Besides, there isn’t the money knocking about so fans would be better thinking about other stuff and talking about the club improving in other aspects because we’re not getting a ground anytime soon.

Is it worth potentially bankrupting a club simply to increase some corporate aspects and because a few precious folk don’t want to sit in an old stadium (these folk seem mythical and I’d imagine don’t got to any games in league 2 other than Donnie away and May be Bradford)…

Your comments about armchair experts and having insider knowledge about safety certificates feels like a dig at me and that`s fine, it`s all about opinions.

I started the post saying I wasn`t an expert and you hardly need insider knowledge to suggest safety certificates may be an issue for the oldest (all wooden) stand still in use at a senior football ground.

Quoted from BobbyCummingsTackle

I would be surprised if there was any chance of getting planning permission for new car parking. Planning at the moment generally tries to discourage car use and encourage public transport. Encouraging cars into the area would also increase congestion on match days and no council will legislate for that. The new Everton stadium has almost no car parking.

I agree entirely about the parking. Fashionable thinking changes all the time - at one time out of town stadia was all the rage, with the car parks seemingly the most important thing. Now it is the complete opposite with planners desperate to reduce car journeys.

This adds to the benefit of perhaps improving BP over time, as it seems it is less of a hindrance in not requiring a massive plot. If we can get any form of decent stadium on that site for playing the matches and an improved corporate presence then that might be OK in the longer term.

A rebuild with clever options to get the fans to the ground might be a plan, but as someone said we are between a rock and a hard place whatever we do.

Quoted from lew chaterleys lover

I agree entirely about the parking. Fashionable thinking changes all the time - at one time out of town stadia was all the rage, with the car parks seemingly the most important thing. Now it is the complete opposite with planners desperate to reduce car journeys.

This adds to the benefit of perhaps improving BP over time, as it seems it is less of a hindrance in not requiring a massive plot. If we can get any form of decent stadium on that site for playing the matches and an improved corporate presence then that might be OK in the longer term.

A rebuild with clever options to get the fans to the ground might be a plan, but as someone said we are between a rock and a hard place whatever we do.

Agreed although I struggle to see thinking about car journeys changing in the foreseeable future, the whole of society is trying to wean itself off them. A number of clubs run very good park and ride schemes from car parks some distance from the ground but that's quite expensive to run for the club.

The other thing that counts against out of town developments is the death of bricks and mortar retail. A lot of new grounds were tied to retail developments (as was the original Gt Coates plan) but the big shops are reluctant to get into that unless they're in a guaranteed spot for footfall etc

I was a big fan of the Freeman St proposal because it seemed to tick a lot of boxes but it appears that it was as much a pipe dream as some of the other schemes imagined during the dark days of the previous regime.

Rebuilding BP is possible, Brentford's new ground was built on a very small parcel of land, but it's the balance between the added expense of that and the cost of a new piece of land with easier access and far fewer restrictions. And the loss of income to the club while chunks of the ground are closed off for building.

And finally, I don't know anything about this but, the council has not been helpful to the club over the years and I can't imagine that the planning committee would be supportive of the disruption that rebuilding BP would cause. Especially if some of the club's neighbours (aka voters) started kicking off about it.

Quoted from BobbyCummingsTackle

Agreed although I struggle to see thinking about car journeys changing in the foreseeable future, the whole of society is trying to wean itself off them. A number of clubs run very good park and ride schemes from car parks some distance from the ground but that's quite expensive to run for the club.

The other thing that counts against out of town developments is the death of bricks and mortar retail. A lot of new grounds were tied to retail developments (as was the original Gt Coates plan) but the big shops are reluctant to get into that unless they're in a guaranteed spot for footfall etc

I was a big fan of the Freeman St proposal because it seemed to tick a lot of boxes but it appears that it was as much a pipe dream as some of the other schemes imagined during the dark days of the previous regime.

Rebuilding BP is possible, Brentford's new ground was built on a very small parcel of land, but it's the balance between the added expense of that and the cost of a new piece of land with easier access and far fewer restrictions. And the loss of income to the club while chunks of the ground are closed off for building.

And finally, I don't know anything about this but, the council has not been helpful to the club over the years and I can't imagine that the planning committee would be supportive of the disruption that rebuilding BP would cause. Especially if some of the club's neighbours (aka voters) started kicking off about it.

Like we say, betwixt a rock and a hard place!

Quoted from aldi_01

It’s a genuine question but how many people do we ‘turn away’ each home game?

We heard all last season there were loads being turned away yet it never seemed more than a handful of fans who had a mate of a mate who couldn’t get a ticket…

What's your dataset to make that conclusion?

There's a number of people here who discuss and debate the ticket situation, many of whom are ST holders so the information wouldn't apply. In a town coupled with surrounding areas of population somewhere in the region of 120,000, it's not possible to fully quantify how many fans we're missing out on based on knowing a very small proportion of them.

The only distinguishing words you've used are 'being turned away'. The club can't/don't/won't turn people away. People are either able to get a ticket because it's available or they're not. The point many of the posters here raise is how many are not turning up because when they look at what is available on the ticketing portal it is a singular ticket here or a row of tickets right at the back of the main stand?

The Osmond has been open and more often than not it hasn't sold out and suggests we don't need to do much to expand. But again, there's a void of knowledge and information as to whether people are choosing not to sit in there for whatever reasons.

Unless you questioned every person in Grimsby, Cleethorpes and surrounding areas and took very targeted information it can never be proven either way. Limited ticket availability in the home ends supports the view that we're outgrowing BP and need to take measures to increase our capacity. The fact we're not selling out the overflow area when the Osmond is open supports the view that we can still get a few more in yet.

This was another topic of debate last season but if the club announced the attendance on tickets sold (which can be referenced to the online ticketing portal) this would probably show a different picture to the spins of the turnstile approach. Take both and we'd answer a third debate about what percentage of ticket holders are not attending per game.

Personally I think we have to have immediate ideas and plans to increase capacity. We're all looking at these last two years and how much change is happening in terms of outlook and engagement with fans. The data is conclusive that we've twice hit record ST sales and so our match going fanbase is increasing, without question. If we have a good season, dare I say it get promoted, that trend will only continue and possibly intensify and we need to be ready to capitalise on people willing to get behind the club whilst we can because there's always a risk that the bubble could burst.

Quoted from lew chaterleys lover

Like we say, betwixt a rock and a hard place!

Maybe we should talk to Scunny about a ground share in (say) Brigg? They sell GP (if they actually own it), we sell BP and we build a brand new 18000 seat stadium. They'd only have to open one stand for a home game.

I'M JOKING!!!

Great post Chris.  The overflow in the Osmond is an interesting point, how often have we sold or got close to selling that out when we've had the option to dip into it.

There's a lot of presumptions that we're having to make when it comes to our capacity, our tickets sold vs bums on seats and demand that isn't/can't be met.

Without wanting to dampen any enthusiasm for this coming season, last season was largely a hard watch.  You take the cup run out of it and it was dull as ditchwater, especially at home.  Yet we continually did or got very close to selling all available tickets.  What's it going to be like when we're entertaining and/or winning lots of games?  

Similarish number of season tickets sold with yet another presumption that the approx. 20% non-renewal rate/new uptake is a case of exiles buying in panic dropping off with the uptake coming from those closer to the ground (and more likely to go to more games).  Logic suggests that those 1,000 new ST holders will largely come from those who wanted to walk-up last season and ended up getting the excrement seats dotted about here, there and everywhere.  So our actual bums on seats might not increase that much.  But again, you add into the equation that we hope to have a better season and I'm not so sure.

I think we need to accept that a new stadium isn't happening, not without one of two things happening first.  1) Someone finds £60million down the back of the sofa that they're happy to throw at a 12,000 purpose built stadium.  2) The costs associated with building a 12,000 purpose built stadium absolutely collapse.  Scenario 1 isn't going to happen.  If scenario 2 happens I suspect the wider knock on would rule us out of any such move anyway.  That means we're at BP, or at least the footprint, of BP for a long, long time.

Essential we make the most of what we can.  Redevelopment is an option and I seem to think that very early in the tenure of 1878 Pettit noted that (or Stockwood referenced it) an area of his expertise is utilising limited space in such situations like this.  To my limited knowledge we don't have anyone frequent this board who's got that level of insight, skills or experience.  It could well be that it's not unfeasible to do some very clever and creative adjustments to turn BP into something very sustainable for the future.

What I do know is that redevelopment doesn't happen overnight.  Nor in the course of a summer.  Any redeveloping or rebuilding of individual stands will take time and it will have to done bit-by-bit.  The costs for this will still be exceptionally high.  Playing crudely with figures but if we decided to rebuild the Main Stand, for example, that's a quarter of your capacity gone for a season.  Now of course once that's rebuilt you would hope that it holds a good portion more, so when you come onto rebuild, lets say, the Pontoon the reduction is a lower percentage of your capacity.  By the time you come to the final stand, it's comparatively minimal to first phase.  

But to start off with, whichever stand we redevelop first, we would be left with about 6,000 capacity as a maximum.  Our recent bar is there or there abouts anyway.  Last season it was felt that if it the gate dipped below 6,000 it was a low gate. As we strive to improve, I think need to stick to that as a minimum.  If we do redevelop, I would hope that some sort of temp seating is in place where possible to reduce the number of lost seats.

When it comes to a corporate offer, we're not even as good as inadequate.  The staff do their best with what they've got but they're swimming against a rip-tide.  Again, if redevelopment happens then the first 'new' stand needs to have the flagship corporate functions in there so we can play catch-up as soon as possible.

I would genuinely love to know what 1878's thoughts and plans are on the future in terms of how we navigate this very tough position.  Fully appreciate they're near certain to not share that for the time.

Crazy idea - rip down the Findus, expand it outwards into the car park, make it wider so it goes to the Ponny and the Osmond, stick some huge sparkly new changing rooms at basement level on that side with a basement car park for the club officials and then have a stonking great hospitality set up, along with club shop and more food/drink outlets across ground floor and 2nd (or even a third tier!). Solves the changing room issues, the corporate issues, the land issues (maybe) and creates more seats in general. All the money making bits taken care of in this 1st phase means it can pay itself off quicker and then allow a rebuild of the next stand in turn etc

Bring on the red crosses!

Quoted from diehardmariner

Great post Chris.  The overflow in the Osmond is an interesting point, how often have we sold or got close to selling that out when we've had the option to dip into it.

There's a lot of presumptions that we're having to make when it comes to our capacity, our tickets sold vs seats on bums and demand that isn't/can't be met.

Without wanting to dampen any enthusiasm for this coming season, last season was largely a hard watch.  You take the cup run out of it and it was dull as ditchwater, especially at home.  Yet we continually did or got very close to selling all available tickets.  What's it going to be like when we're entertaining and/or winning lots of games?  

Similarish number of season tickets sold with yet another presumption that the approx. 20% non-renewal rate/new uptake is a case of exiles buying in panic dropping off with the uptake coming from those closer to the ground (and more likely to go to more games).  Logic suggests that those 1,000 new ST holders will largely come from those who wanted to walk-up last season and ended up getting the excrement seats dotted about here, there and everywhere.  So our actual bums on seats might not increase that much.  But again, you add into the equation that we hope to have a better season and I'm not so sure.

I think we need to accept that a new stadium isn't happening, not without one of two things happening first.  1) Someone finds £60million down the back of the sofa that they're happy to throw at a 12,000 purpose built stadium.  2) The costs associated with building a 12,000 purpose built stadium absolutely collapse.  Scenario 1 isn't going to happen.  If scenario 2 happens I suspect the wider knock on would rule us out of any such move anyway.  That means we're at BP, or at least the footprint, of BP for a long, long time.

Essential we make the most of what we can.  Redevelopment is an option and I seem to think that very early in the tenure of 1878 Pettit noted that (or Stockwood referenced it) an area of his expertise is utilising limited space in such situations like this.  To my limited knowledge we don't have anyone frequent this board who's got that level of insight, skills or experience.  It could well be that it's not unfeasible to do some very clever and creative adjustments to turn BP into something very sustainable for the future.

What I do know is that redevelopment doesn't happen overnight.  Nor in the course of a summer.  Any redeveloping or rebuilding of individual stands will take time and it will have to done bit-by-bit.  The costs for this will still be exceptionally high.  Playing crudely with figures but if we decided to rebuild the Main Stand, for example, that's a quarter of your capacity gone for a season.  Now of course once that's rebuilt you would hope that it holds a good portion more, so when you come onto rebuild, lets say, the Pontoon the reduction is a lower percentage of your capacity.  By the time you come to the final stand, it's comparatively minimal to first phase.  

But to start off with, whichever stand we redevelop first, we would be left with about 6,000 capacity as a maximum.  Our recent bar is there or there abouts anyway.  Last season it was felt that if it the gate dipped below 6,000 it was a low gate. As we strive to improve, I think need to stick to that as a minimum.  If we do redevelop, I would hope that some sort of temp seating is in place where possible to reduce the number of lost seats.

When it comes to a corporate offer, we're not even as good as inadequate.  The staff do their best with what they've got but they're swimming against a rip-tide.  Again, if redevelopment happens then the first 'new' stand needs to have the flagship corporate functions in there so we can play catch-up as soon as possible.

I would genuinely love to know what 1878's thoughts and plans are on the future in terms of how we navigate this very tough position.  Fully appreciate they're near certain to not share that for the time.

Good post. Temp seats in the Constitutional and Imperial Ave corners could go a fair way to offsetting the loss of seats if The Main was redeveloped and then The Main would be ready for whatever was going to happen on the other side of the ground.

Another option could be safe standing and that would offer us a lot more capacity.