jess

No it isn't.  Kingsford is below the level of all of Westhill, you'll see it from up on the golf course, Hillside/Hilltop, but compared to Tesco, or the Arnhall business park, nowhere near as visually intrusive.

 

Kingsford is a great location to get to as opposed to a stadium in Linksfield that is a traffic nightmare. You're just coming out with nostalgic arguments rather than logical ones.

Sure fits in

Here's some logic

Between 11-2:30 on a Saturday there are 40 bus routes with 480 bus services arriving within walking distance of Pittodrie. This for 2200 people.

Between 11-3 the transport assessment with public and special buses includes 3 bus routes along the A944, B9119 and Dyce P&R with 65 bus services. This for at least 6000 people.

*In before imaginary buses will appear to serve 4 fans whenever they want to get on a bus

2800 walking down to 344.

I make that 415 less options, 37 less routes and 2456 now having to travel. Great location. The club will thrive with the greater ease of getting there in a Dons heartland.

And what effect will the AWPR have on a stadium in the city.

Even though I'm not a nimby nor affected by this, it's clearly a giant red stadium much bigger than any other 'why didn't they oppose that' developments in the most prominent place possible, and is indeed the last remaining border.

We either have an unbelievable stadium in a bad location or a basic one in a great location. There is no trade off with what's proposed and it seems many won't appreciate the loss of identity until they're watching fake aberdeen fc in such a stadium outside the city.

McInnes is destroying him.

Fight was one thing we did see from Ryan on Sunday so I'm certainly not going to criticise him for nae speaking to the meeja.

Really? May as well have been sent off. Might have rallied the team like the last game against them. Instead he scared the shit out the defence, gave away the ball for the 1st and could have stopped the 2nd if we wasn't asleep on his heels.

Absolute garbage.  Club officials took numerous questions and hung around the various plans and drawings on display to answer questions.

 

You sound like the utter galloot who was at the first westhill public consultation, who stood there berating the Dons rep (one of the guys who often mans the main door on match day whoever he is), and who pontificated "its a disgrace, it's being built in Westhill (erm no) and we're not even being consulted"....to which he got the obvious reply.."we're here now, we're giving you a chance to see and complain now,  but the stadiums not even in Westhill, or Aberdeenshire, we don't have to be here"

 

I could have given him a reacharound right there. Fat galloot was left stammering.

They knew absolutely nothing, said there 'would be shuttle buses and parking' and obviously they couldn't have all the information until the assessments etc.....8 months and every authority objecting later...

A pitiful attempt #3 at this idea and Milne should step down as soon as it's rejected.

Seriously? Public consultation event at 4 Mile, where Dons reps were barracked and verbally assaulted. Two, yes TWO  Public consultations at the Westhill Inn, and finally an exhibition at Pittodrie, which WECC were specifically invited to, and which everyone was made aware of at their big NO meeting in November (where supporters of the plan were also loudly barracked).

 

There was more than enough public consultation, one thing which the club cannot with any seriousness be charged with.

It was a few printouts with no information whatsoever.

Club officials sitting around staring at their phone leaving fans to take the flak.

It was deliberate, to hide the reality from fans and locals.

Milne is absolutely hellbent on delivering his own vision of an out of town stadium and training ground which he sees as his legacy, after which he will sell up and go. Leaving us, the fans expected to attend games, to live with a cheap soulless ground nae even in Aberdeen with farcically limited options to get there and when and how to experience gan to the football.

I think you may have misread the 3D image if you think any of the proposed houses are closer to the existing houses than the stadium.

Either way before anyone can even consider building houses on the Pittodrie site they have to submit a detailed planning application (similar amount of information to the Kingsford stadium application).

Planning permission in principle only means the council have said 'yes this area could be used for up to 350 houses.

Also what point are you trying to make by posting Generic 3D visuals from an approved 'Planning permission in principle' application?

Are you suggesting that the locals would rather have a football stadium on their doorstep as opposed to brand new housing and green spaces?

If the club does relocated and Pittodrie is turned into houses the house prices in that area will jump and the residents won't have to put up with restricted parking on matchdays or the potential risk having 20000 people suddenly decend on your doorstep every second weekend.

 

Anyway on the subject of daylighting problems with stadiums this is an example of when football clubs fail to take it into consideration and lose in court.

 

The proposed houses are right on the edge of the land at all sides in the masterplan.

It could even be bigger student accommodation all over. Look at the height of most developments in that area.

Yes I think many would prefer a stadium. The place would lose its character and, from comments defending against the NKS marauding pisshose fans myth, many on pittodrie street and merkland road enjoy living next to it and the life.

If we really wanted a solution we would find at least one. We could actually consult with the locals. We could try working with the council rather than making them an enemy, playing the victim and trying to bully everyone into accepting it.

No. It's nae. There's not a bunch of flats behind their equivalent Souther. The light-blocker from their Souther, I expect, will nae be cause the same issue as ours because it's nae residential. I'm making this assumption, as the cooncil have just allowed a glass box monstrosity to be placed within half a metre of an historic building in our very own city centre. I suspect that, had that historic building been residential, the cooncil would still have found a way to pass the abomination at Marischal college.

I don't see that being the case.  It would be further away for a start. The other option is a much closer house looking into their window.

Again you still haven't found one with a similar situation to pittodrie.

 

Not a single stand at Windsor park backs onto a public road and all fan access and egress is from controlled zones around the stadium before entering public roads.

The Windsor park redevelopment also had the advantage of the 3 redeveloped sides not being boxed in by domestic properties.

It would be exactly the same at Pittodrie with space behind all except the main?

If there's a solution to this then I do not have a clue how you can't apply the same thing.

Brand New Stadium on unconstrained plot of land

 

 

As opposed to existing stadium constrained by Housing, & Collector Roads.

 

 

If you are going to continue with 'This is how I see the redeveloped pittodrie looking', may I suggest you search for examples of redeveloped stadiums in constrained environments.

Windsor Park

As said by many.....absolutely awful looking. And the pricetag......it isnt really relevant as land purchase costs in a backwater of Poland are a helluva lot cheaper than even a site on the extremities of Scotland's third largest city and "oil capital" of Europe. Even moreso, construction costs in Poland are also a fraction of the cost of those here. All those Polish bricklayers, sparkies, plumbers etc aint coming here for the weather.....wages here are 2-3 times better than what they get paid there.

Pretty certain that on top of all this, red tape in Poland (and indeed virtually all over Europe) is far less stringent than we have here in the UK. All adds up to making a project there probably half the cost of what an equivalent stadium here would come in at.

 

Of course we mustnt let the W.A.N.K.S get wind of this. They'll be firing in emails to Wiggy informing him of how cheap we could do things there. Relocate to near the Ukraine border and we will save ££££££££s! Aberdeenski FC anyone?

£19.8m one is in Germany. Polish one was about £10m. Aesthetics are not the focus. On that point I think moving away the design and everything matters a lot to make fans go there. If it was something like Juventus's stadium we were going to I could see the experience negating the location. But it's nae, even supporters of the move don't think the stadium itself is great. Whereas Pittodrie is already a mess and almost anything would be seen as improvements.

That looks fuckin dreadful.

It could look much better but it was the access I was referring to.

View wise I'd much rather see a game from basically any seat there.

Firhill North stand

1) Has two circulation routes.

    One at the Front between the seats and the advertisement boards

    One underneath the Seats accessed from within the stand by two Vomitories.

2) Both Circulation routes are accessed from a large open concourse between the stand and the turnstiles. This Space will act as a holding area in an emergency so evacuation can be controlled IE 2000 people are not immediately running onto Firhill Road blocking/ getting knocked down by Emergency vehicles.

3) Whilst the stand technically has only one entry point via Firhill Road (The Old Terrace was accessed from both Firhill Road & what is now known as Firhill Court) the open concourse also appears to provide access to circulation route along the front of the old Main stand. Fans could be directed this way should part of the concourse be required for Emergency vehicle parking.

 

Heres the thing about Firhill's redevelopment

 

1) Only the Main stand is constrained by a Collector Road. Try to redevelop that and they will face the same problems the Dons will.

2) All other access around the stadium was for the stadium ie no houses, flats etc needed it. See point 1

3) Partick had a larger footprint behind their old Terrace as it was curved like Hampden. So large in fact they were able to build a stand and sell land to a developer to build 4 Blocks of Student flats whilst still maintaining the necessary shared access road around the 3 sides of the stadium.

 

 

 

If you like I can tell you the reasons the opposite end of Firhill is not currently used.

Cheers for explanations regardless if I disagree on whatever.

I'm almost certain Kingsford will be rejected which is why I'm looking at this.

Found Paderborn's stadium which is exactly what I was envisioning access and concourse wise and probably how most imagine a redeveloped 3 sides.

15,000 capacity cost £19.8m in 2008. A Polish team bought the same design because it was so cheap and did it for 10,000.

I'm really not sure what point you are making, other than illustrating how the Pittodrie footprint only has room for 2x New Douglas Parks (5400 not counting the temporary stand) plus a little more for what can be built in the slightly larger space at one end, presumably taking it up to around 12k.

 

Or am i missing the point?  Sorry if i am.  Tom has already gone through a wealth of explanations as to what could be fitted on the site in this thread, especially if you dig back a few years (this thread has been going since 2011).

 

I'm happy to defer to his view that while there might be room for some tweaking, its not going to give us much more than 12k, and its definitely not going to give us the 18k+ that we need.

 

I think we really need to move on from viewing Pittodrie as viable and focus on the proposals for new locations that have been mooted.

It's 12,000 with no main stand, no corners and 15 metres behind the 2 stands.

And was paid for by Tesco

 

It is also within a self contained site with no major roads running right behind the stands. Fans exiting the stadium do so into carpark and concourse areas

Can everyone please understand that the moment the Main Stand & Merkland are demolished the requirement for controllable emergency concourses kicks in. Merkland Lane & Pittodrie Street are public 'collector' roads which can only be closed for maintenance or in emergency situations. This is why you risk getting run down when queuing to get in and when leaving.

You cannot close these streets without providing an equal & approved alternative as you are affecting emergency/ service vehicle access for the surrounding residential & commercial businesses.

This means the break out concourse will need to be contained within the footprint of both IE the entire capacity of the stand can be contained without anyone being forced to step onto the roads (perhaps even the pavement depending on where the site boundary is). The only way I can see this being achieved in the Main & Merkland is to (as Ten Caat has already said) move all admin/ changing rooms etc to the South. Raise the seating area up on stilts and put the turnstiles right at the front (as close to the pitch as possible) making it look similar to Hamilton's ground from the inside. Fans would walk underneath the stands, through the turnstiles then walk alongside the pitch and up sets of stairs. The circulation route between the turnstiles and the pitch would depend on the  stand capacity. A 1000 seat stand requires a 5.3m wide route. A 2000 seat stand would require 10.6m and so on (5.3mm x capacity).

Allowing for a cantilevered roof, support columns etc cuts the number of potential seating rows however it wouldn't matter how many seats you could install, you would only get a safety certificate for the amount of fans which can safely escape and be contained in an emergency.

 

The redeveloped south stand has the problem of having to achieve a wide enough escape routes for fans + the additional width required for emergency vehicle access a the same time as a mass evacuation. Having to fit Admin offices, changing rooms, corporate facilities etc further complicates this.

 

You would have more chance of getting more than 12000 seats if you actually removed the main stand completely thereby turning pittodrie into a 3 sided stadium, move the pitch closer to pittodrie street allowing the South stand footprint to be increased. This might actually allow a redeveloped south stand to be constructed higher than the existing depending on the distance between it and the flats behind.

This then adds the complication of adapting/ extending the RDS.

Can't build any higher than existing without objections from the neighbours

If you fill in the corners how do emergency vehicles get onto the pitch?

If you fill in the corners how would a mass evacuation from the pitch be achieved (The last resort for stadiums is fans escaping onto the pitch and out through the emergency vehicle access routes)?

 

As above it doesnt matter how many seats or standing places you put in, you will only get a safety certificate for the number of people who can be safely evacuated and if necessary contained in a protected area.

I understand about the emergency routes and evacuation.

Hamilton, 6000 seats. Walkways and what's behind them included, in our footprint.

12,000. £40m. Sorry, I will die before I accept this.

I prefer the stands like those as well, on that point. Front row is a great view compared to not being able to see a thing.

Partick Thistle's north stand. 2,000 capacity. Half of it built in 2004 onwards I believe. Not as deep as our main stand.

Ye see, out of all your other good points, it all comes back to this. The 12,000 capacity. That is the only important thing here. You're right, it would be a huge loss.

 

I think you have little difficulty showing how it'd be possible for us to only have 12,000 capacity. However, do you genuinely believe that if someone came to you and asked to 16,000 seats - lets say - on Pittodrie's site that you wouldn't be able to find a way? It is my opinion - as I've mentioned - that the 12,000 figure was requested. That the appraisal for re-development of Pittodrie was specifically targeted at producing a case for re-location rather than case for re-development. That's why we've got such a low figure, that's why we have no drawings to back it up. I guarantee that if there were drawings, then qualified folks such as yersel would be able to pick holes in it and submit improvements that could really elevate the capacity. The 12,00 fugure isn't the result of trying every possible conceptual design and shape, eeking out every single square inch and additional seat. It's a result of being asked to downplay the existing site and come up with a figure that makes it ridiculous to re-develop. I don't believe otherwise, and I don't believe that anyone on here - including you - really believes otherwise. Yes, you can show how they could have arrived at 12K, but do you believe that, that is the best possible capacity in that site?

 

Because that's why I find your arguments slightly strange. I think you know that the 12K is low, and I find it strange that you need to back-up the club on this. We're all dons fans (nae sure about 100%AK) and all want what's best for the club, and I understand that. But we are the club and this should be our decision, nae some temporary Milne custodian. We're not being given a fair representation of the existing site here. The same effort has not been made for Pittodrie as has Loirston, Kingsford and th'ither een fae years back. We should be looking at a 20K Kingsford design and, let's say, a 15K Pittodrie design that can be poured over and reviewed and asked as fans of the club to make a decision. If ever there was a call for a referendum cunty thing, this was it. This is a decision being made for us and playing on the fact that folk like a shiny new thing while deliberately playing down the alternative. This is us for the next 100 years. We're being deliberately deprived of the facts, and I'm surprised more folk on here aren't up in arms about it.

 

There's no sentimentality from my point of view, this is a bad business decision in my opinion, based on pushing through the stubborn desires of one man.

St Mirren's separated stands on 3 sides, which have concourses and a full deep main stand, fit in our footprint with loads of room to spare and hold 6390. The stadium cost £8m. The Merkland end could be much bigger and the corners filled in either with corporate or offices there instead of in the main (south) stand (which would save more space on that side) or more seats. I absolutely refuse to believe you could not have a 16,000 seater. With standing even 17-18,000.

Re: cutting off £2m, yes if it was 12,000 capacity, not if it was 15 or more and the average increased above our current one.

Re: barrier replacement, one that isn't on the goal line, or a different design and type. I don't know if you can have the ones with no rail on top like at Groningen's stadium, but that would solve it.

Lets see now.

A club in the 3rd largest city in Scotland which on several occasions a season can bring in crowds of 20000 even when they are losing should cut their capacity thereby reducing arguably their largest potential income stream

I would love to seem them (or indeed any other business) approach potential sponsers/ funders with that business plan.

If there was ever an example of Scottish lack of ambition.

Our attendances in all of McInnes's games in the last 4 seasons:

Are we reliant on those hun, tim and european games?

RDS

The only 'modern' stand in the stadium but it was built before UEFA started their bullshit  pitch size regulations. To allow for European matches to be played the pitch had to be lengthened which fucked up the sight lines from the Upper Tier so from certain seats you struggle to see the goal line.

So fans go through all the stress of those other stands to better see the goal line you can't see from almost every part of the other stands?

I have wondered why they don't replace the barrier at the front.

 

The small away supports are due to Pittodries facilities? Well having sat in the away section I can see why. 1/3 of it is uncovered, there is no windshield from the north Sea elements, the fence blocks your view of the south/ merkland corner flag and there are barely any catering facilities or enough toilets.

There is also the 'Aberdeen is miles away' mentality. Perth is OK, Dundee at a push but that last 60miles? no chance

 

What other teams forums are actually discussing the new Dons stadium any more than 'i see the sheep are trying to move'?

Please provide links to these discussions as I am actually interested to see their thoughts and also the people saying they wont go because of having to use a shuttle bus.

http://www.hmfckickback.co.uk/index.php?/topic/165864-pittodrie-unfit-for-purpose/page-2

http://forum.followfollow.com/showthread.php?1083417-Aberdeen-on-brink-of-historic-%A340million-stadium-move

 

What is a myth? That trying to understand the PA announcements from the centre of the pitch is extremely difficult?

That noise from one stand is barely audible from another due to the open nature of the ground?

 

There's no atmosphere because of the uneven stands.

When there's any singing you can hear it from anywhere. There's no atmosphere because nobody sings and when most do it's at speaking volume. If there's the same lack of singing in a new stadium there would still be no atmosphere, which will be the case till they sell booze at home games and inhibitions are lost.

No the answer is YOU have decided they wont.

Where does it say the ticket prices will increase? How do you know that this ultra modern stadium wont allow the club to charge £22 per ticket which includes a free ticket on the shuttle bus.

How do you know that the ticket prices may increase to say £25 but you get a 'free' snack & drink & shuttle bus ticket with it?

Where does it say prices will decrease and a core focus is to make football genuinely affordable to increase attendances? Do you think the above is actually likely and how?

A disaster will be when the Safety certificate for the Main Stand is revoked. A disaster will be when the Capacity of the South Stand is cut in order to obtain the safety certificate or eventually closing altogether when  inadequte pre war foundations finally lose their battle with the sandy soil. Do you know how much it costs to underpin or even replace foundations?

These are genuine threats and no matter how much money the club spends on maintenance there will come a time wont be able to get around the ever evolving health & safety regulations.

Yes, a lot. When is it likely to happen? In the worst possible case the RDS and Merkland hold 10,000.

 

Here's a case for moving stadium

To redevelop pittodrie the following costs/losses will arise

1) No immediate capital from selling pittodrie to developers.

 

2) Loans taken out to pay for the re-building of 3 stands. The new stands will have to allow for future pitch expansion (UEFA did it once, they can easily do it again) modern emergency access,  crowd circulation, toilet & catering facilties, corporate. The foundations for these new stands will be more expensive due to the sandy soil.

The club will need to approach investors, funders, banks etc with a business model that shows they are cutting their potential income streams to do all this thereby making it harder for them to pay the loans off quickly. This does not give them a strong footing for getting a good deal. Nothing quite like a high interest long term loan to cripple you.

 

3) Losing one stand at a time means the lower capacity stadium starts immediately. If the South stand goes first the capacity immediately drops to 12000. Having to accommodate away fans means home support seats are cut even further. The new south stand will be significantly smaller (it cant be any taller than existing without potential legal challenges and it must comply with modern stadia regs) so lets say it ended up being 4000 seats. The next stand you lose is the Merkland and its replacement's capacity will be about half of the existing (about 1500). Then the Main stand goes and once again new stand will have a capacity about 50% of the existing possible even less if they try to maintain corporate facility levels.

Lower fan potential = less ticket money, less potential merchandise sales, less money from catering, less money from pitch side sponsors= less playing budget and so on

 

4) Still got to build those training facilities somewhere

But you're talking as if we average about 5,000 more than we do. We struggle to break 10,000 season ticket holders which includes the smaller deals. A better smaller stadium full the majority of the time would be an improvement financially. They've planned/hoped for an average of 13,750 at Kingsford. The submission relies on that in a lot of areas.

Corporate doesn't have to be in the main stand and 1500 is about 11 rows of the very shallow Merkland. Is that right?

What's with them building onto Merkland Lane and Pittodrie Street in the housing plans with rerouted roads? Is there no scope for us to do anything like that? Have we tried?

 

Evidence of this please?

And by evidence I mean an actual masterplan of the site which would allow a proper budget cost to be calculated and not just a figure picked out of the air by builder.

All I have ever seen for this Kings Links stadium was a couple of artists impressions so if you have access to a fully master-planned scheme like the ones for Loriston or Kingsford please either post it here or PM me as I genuinely want to see it.

 

Did that £42million allow for compensating/ relocating the Golf course/ driving range?

Did it include the car-parking, road upgrades, flood defences (yes that's right), complicated ground preparation and foundation design, training facilites?

 

I've heard builders say they could build a house for £120k only for this to almost double when the planning drawings are complete and then rise again once the Structural Engineer gets involved.

http://www.aberdeencity.gov.uk/nmsruntime/saveasdialog.asp?lID=73327&sID=27599

Blanked out costs version but it's referred to in council meetings as 10% more than Loirston which was £38m. It says who came up with the cost there.

Likewise have I missed proof of redevelopment capacity and cost on basically anything?

You've not got a clue jess. Simple as that

About what?

How about... erm... having to move as redeveloping the existing site to anywhere near the same capacity is impossible?

What for?

Guaranteed benefits - what are they?

Bigger crowds - Who knows? Should the team suddenly win the league and go back to the days of Fergie them perhaps distance is no object.

Knowing you wont get frostbite or soaking wet while straining to see past a fence, supporting pillar, or some random who wont sit down from a seat which is either bolted down to a former terrace or a plastic replacement for one first installed before the first world war and having the option to buy snacks & drinks prepared in modern facilities. Suddenly the £21-25.00 per ticket doesnt seem quite so bad.

You can get all of the above in parts of Pittodrie which are empty.

Bigger away crowds? - EH? Are you a Kilmarnock board member or one of Doncaster & Reagans cronies? AFCs priority is to their own fans and the business model is thankfully not based on getting 4 OF away crowds a season.

I presume you are aware the club cut the OF allocations a couple of seasons back so they now get the same as everyone else.

Often thrown about claims the small away supports are due to the facilities. Other team's forums are actually full of them saying there'd be no point going and they're not getting a shuttle bus.

More Atmosphere Created/ more unwelcoming cauldron? - A purpose built fully enclosed arena as opposed to a mishmash of stands of different heights one of which isn't even fully covered.

Yeah I can see why you are having trouble understanding this 

You want to find out about the acoustics of Pittodrie, take a trip into the middle of the pitch on a match day and try to see if you can understand to the PA announcements.

You may think you are in a cauldron of noise in the RDS whilst your mate sat in the Main stand thinks its so quiet they can choose to listen to an arguing couple 6 rows behind them.

When everyone sings there's a great atmosphere and when they don't there isn't any at all. Everything else is a myth. It's not going to change no matter what shape or size anything is.

Ticket Prices? - No one knows the answer to this. Supply and demand will have a factor as will club expenses. Anyone claiming the new stadium automatically equals more expensive tickets with the evidence currently available is scaremongering.

Increasing maintenance costs for a wooden/ possibly asbestos ridden main stand and a sinking/cracking south stand on the other hand.

Can they get cheaper was the point. The answer is they won't. They've said they'll be adding to them for parking and buses.

Winning more at home? - Home teams generally win more often at home because bugger me if they don't play at their HOME stadium more than the AWAY team.

However a shit home team on the other hand

17 years ago we finished bottom of the league and only won 10 of 23 competitive home games (only 6 league games) and lost 6-0 & 5-1 (twice) to everyone's favourite glasgow teams.  Did anyone blame Pittodrie for that?

Would it have happened in a modern stadium with modern training facilities? Maybes aye, Maybes naw.

Is anyone suggesting Pittodrie is the main factor in this seasons home form?

I know all that. I'm looking for the case for moving stadium. It seems to be, to save money on maintenance and kitchens and the rest we don't have a clue and could be a disaster.

There is being negative and there is basically trolling. Coming on here and just laughing or slagging the clubs attempts to get a better stadium rather than pointing out actual alternatives falls into the latter.

And don't re-start the broken record of 'pittodrie can easily be redeveloped to a modern 20000 capacity stadium' unless you can prove you work or have ever worked for the likes of Arup, Miller partnership, Herzog & De Meuron, Foster Associates or Populous.

Do that and the floor shall be open for your presentation.

I don't think it needs to be 20,000 or anywhere near that but understand we have to have a minimum of this due to the cock measuring contest with Hearts and Hibs and we like 7,000 empty seats for 34 games a season.

I think something like Maribor's stadium is more suited to us, perhaps with a large Bayer Leverkusen type corporate end.

The cost of a 21,000 Links stadium was to be £42m.

Well it's good to see Yule and the club come out and immediately correct the headline and sub headline which say

Aberdeen could cease to exist if £50m stadium move fails warns club vice-chairman

 

George Yule says there is a danger Dons fans will no longer have a team to support if plan doesn’t get the go-ahead.

to put to rest any such nonsense, because that's definitely not what he was implying when he said 'they may not have a team to support'.

One example of people defending something staring them in the face just because the WANKS have said it.

Here was the original full quote

Could it cast doubts on the future of Aberdeen?

 

Yeh I think in the long term it would. Absolutely. I'm on record as saying when people have said to me 'what about the whole city centre experience with fans walking up King Street to come to the game, and the pubs and golf clubs enjoying business off the back of that.' I say 'well, I've been in business long enough to know that businesses have got to look after themselves not just overly rely on others as the likes of the golf clubs have done. To be honest, unless we move this club into the 21st century with proper facilities there's a very real danger that those fans walking up King Street in the long term may not have a team to support.

What a completely out of touch cunt.

What does anyone see improving by moving the stadium out there? Bigger crowds ? Bigger away crowds? More atmosphere ? Ticket prices? Winning more at home ? A more unwelcoming cauldron hated by the huns and tims where we can beat anyone on our day?

Now admittedly he does say that if proper facilities are not found then the long term future of the club is at stake, no denying that... it's hardly a hysterical "if the kingsford plans arent passed the club is dying" though is it?

“To be honest, unless we move this club into the 21st century with proper facilities, there's a very real danger those fans walking up King Street in the long term may not have a team to support."

Come on. 

Ironically we wouldn't be walking up King Street, we wouldn't be walking and we wouldn't have a club to support in the city.

Nope, it was 3.4 miles form the train station uphill, which is why I was against it too. A station at Altens would have helped mind you. It was equally as accessible by vehicle as Kingsford (given both would/will have been completed post bypass). If a station existed then Loirston would have been better than Kingsford, but still nae great.

 

It's weird, as it didn't seem that there was nearly much support for Loirston as there is for Kingsford. I can only assume it's the northen shire supporters that are pro-Kingsford, although it seems stupid given the bypass would mean probably only an additional ten minutes from Loirston. Or maybe everyone has been worn down? Can anyone on here suggest a reason why Kingsford is better?

Say No To Kingsford Stadium popped up.

People asked questions or tried to wind them up and got blocked and annoyed.

Say YES to Kingsford popped up and thousands joined for the laugh.

People from No Kingsford made accusations against football fans which galvanised support for it and rooted people into defending even complete tosh.

Anyone who questions anything about it on social media are attacked by the baying mob so most who oppose it or have concerns don't say anything and others don't see opposition to it so go along with it.

The Makro area is an hour's walk from town, which seemed a never going back deal breaker. We've replaced it with a 2 hour walk from town. There's definitely a big silent opposition out there.

Loirston seemed like insanity till they came up with this, which is just a farce yet has more support because of the outrageous 'might have no club to support' propaganda and the emphasis being on the training facilities at Kingsford.

At least far more people could walk and theoretically walk to Loirston, the transport plan for a 21,000 midweek game was approved, and if the train station was rebuilt it would have been pretty good.

Yes it's related. When did our more professional approach begin? When did we start to attract investment, like, as you say, WmDonald? When did our merchandising improve?

 

The abandoned match was down to the archaic sub station that services Pittodrie, so you're blaming an external event on George Yule, but the run of improvements which he has a hand in not on him. Incredible.

Merchandise changed before Yule.

McInnes turned us from a running joke into stable world and tim beaters turning a profit after which came bigger deals.

I'm looking for what he did. I don't see any training facilities. Pittodrie is almost black and the inside just being left to rot. He thinks coach transport to games from 3 locations is a viable future.

 

You admit the Dons have come on leaps and bounds since George came on board I presume?

Is that related?

Our improved fortunes on the pitch and financially are solely down to Derek McInnes...and the mysterious donation from the Donald's.

The stadium is in a worse state than ever before and a match was abandoned only a few months ago. No training base after 5 years....what am I missing? Add in a stadium application which so far has been rejected by about 7 consultees.