RicoS321

I'm worried in case it comes true.

The series is on Amazon I think. Was considering watching it, but I was too freaked out by the title.

I hate Hertz much more than the Jute fucks.

Fantastic news. Wonder how long until he starts at left back.

It suffers from its own atrocious design, that is all. It fucks the countries that need a leg up, whilst rewarding those who least need it. The yanks are dicks, but they back up their states through their currency.

Except you're not correct. There is no evidence at all that we'd have to sell flats, and you provided none. Evidence would be a diagram showing the trajectory of light over a proposed development. Anything else is informed or uninformed speculation. But you're probably not a dick. That was uncalled for. Apologies. I have no evidence, nor have I ever suggested I did. The onus has never been on me to provide it. I'm suggesting that there's a drawing out there that shows the 12.5K that I'd like to see. It must exist, or else that figure wouldn't.

Seriously? Whilst more convenient for holidays, it's a fucking disaster of a currency, by design. It only came to being through being shat out of an argument between France and Germany, and its lack of recycling mechanism would kill Scotland. Or it might not, but on the other hand we'd be profiting at the serious expense of Greece, Ireland or some other victim. It completely lacks the "in it together" design that the US dollar has (for example), and goes against everything that the European project is supposed to promote. It's a disgrace, and Scotland should stay the fuck away from it.

I won't quote it Tom, but fantastic post (the big een). Answers a lot of questions, thanks. The thing I struggle with, though, is that there are huge hurdles for the new stadium too. Why should these be seen as something that can be overcome, but not those at Pittodrie? I'd have thought that those more used to a stadium on their doorstep would be more pliable. Or is it just the fact that there are no specific planning regulations that prevent Kingsford (is it on greenbelt)? Also, would it have been that difficult to outline the 12,500 seater stadium as well as provide the reasoning that you have (otherwise how do you come up with that figure)? They spent £400K on the consultation if I remember correctly. Surely that could buy a set of outline plans? It's just always struck me that the club have not provided the detail, or even attempted to, so that people can see for themselves. The consultation struck me as one of those consultations that governments do to provide "evidence" to back up a plan they've already devised and are going to go ahead with regardless, so I hope folk can see why I'm sceptical. Anyway, no further questions, thanks for your post.

Aye, very good. None of that is evidence that we'd need to buy the flats, which you entirely made up and presented in a condescending tone. Tom has the decency to answer the question properly, you just come across as a dick.

Excellent post Tom, some great stuff in there. Interesting. Have you ever compared the depth of Hearts/Hibs versus oor Soother? It's be interesting to see the required space and what we're missing. Also, I've never thought we'd actually have to build over roads and so on. Pittodrie street is very wide, there's a lot of space to move a stand back, I'd reckon about 4 metres at least just by removing parking on that stretch of road. That may cause issue on non-match day, but you could just open the DD concourse for parking for shop-visitors (or the mainer car park). That road isn't used for traffic parking on match day, opposition bus, drop-offs aside. Finally, as you mention, our stands are just bolted on terraces, meaning they're really shallow. We could easily gain a few extra rows by making them steeper. Each row adds a few hundred seats. But, again, because we can't see the breakdown of the 12,500 seater suggestion, it's impossible to put it to bed, or to see if it would be possible to eek out an extra few thousand seats with better design. With your architectural experience, do you genuinely believe that we'd lose the entire capacity of the South Stand by re-building the South, Mainer and Merkland? It seems insane. Or a lie. I'm going for the latter. And to the rest of you reading my solo attempts to remain, what sort of capacity would make your decision difficult? Hypothetically, if we were offered a 17-18K stadium at Pittodrie or a 20K one at Westhill, which would you choose? Or, more importantly, which do you think would be best for the club? It's interesting that Tom says that the 20K was a red-line for supporters. My opinion was that the 20K was a red-line for moving stadium in order to make it worthwhile building a new one rather than an actual requirement. I actually think it'll get knocked down to 19K by the time its actually built anyway, but that's just an entirely un-backed suspicion.

So you have no evidence then? So we wouldn't have to buy the flats? We'd just have to design the current stand differently? The current stand that is almost flat and provides a terrible view for those that aren't directly on the half way line or standing in an uncovered part. Even if you lost 30-50% in depth, you'd gain another 10-15% in height. Lets say you'd lose 3,000 seats in the South Stand (I'm sure there could be an increase in the Main and Merkie), so what? How does that get us to a capacity of 12,500? My point isn't that we should be moving from Pittodrie (that's just my opinion), it's that we're being lied to and not being given all the options. Because if you offered folks an 18,000 seater at Pittodrie or a circa 20,000 seater at Kingsford, I'm absolutely certain the former would get the support. So we're being told 12,500 seats so that only an idiot would think we'd stay put. I want to see the evidence to back up the 12,500 seats and no-one is able to give it. I want to be able to make an informed choice based on evidence rather than some happy-clappy shite about "needing to move on". You haven't provided any evidence, despite a pretty confident statement.

Shiraz. Tidy.

Great, another centre party, that's what we need. Whilst I'm all for integration with Europe, the Euro and the European parliament is a fucked up disaster (the Euro especially) that showed no sign of ever changing.

Aye, very good, take the easy bit and ignore the bit you don't have an answer for. Would it seriously make a difference for a season? It was entirely hypothetical too, I don't believe any of our stands would take a year to re-build, but I've no idea, nor do I think we'd need to share, I'm sure it could be worked around like the beach end was. Inverness shared with us and didn't end them. I'm merely suggesting that there a million ways round the issue, and it's very short term (not suggesting it's easy either btw). Certainly not worth moving ground for.

Have you got any evidence to back that up?

So? It's going to last another hundred years (in theory), a few years of dicking about is a drop in the ocean. We could even share with Utd for a season if really necessary. Do you think the Tims regret using hampden for a year, or should they have moved out of Glasgow to some green belt land that saved away fans coming into the city? You're asking the wrong questions, it really is just a question of whether you think the city centre location is better than Westhill and then you hold the club to account for the rest. I don't think we should make our decision on whether or not to move our club out of its city on an imagined new planning law that will prevent us getting permission on the application we've not yet submitted.

Yep, I think the traffic one is a non-issue. To the extent that it's difficult to take him seriously on his other issue, parking, which will be an issue. At least he didn't use the fear of hooliganism approach.

Do you know his reasons for doing so? Care to share them?

Trump and Gove struggle to grasp the rules of Rock, Paper, Scissors.

There's actually no evidence of that in the accounts, despite what we've all heard. If players were being paid directly from Milne, then we'd have a bit of a player registration issue on our hands too. Any money Milne has loaned to the club has been converted to Preferential shares as far as I'm aware, which would become liquid on the sale of the ground. Have you any evidence to back up your assertion? Land acquisition is a long game, so it wouldn't be unusual for someone with plenty of cash to look for a gain 20+ year gain. However, I think Milne enjoys being AFC chairman and is quite passionate about the club (on the pitch, anyway) and so I don't believe he has the "flats on the grun" motivation. I just think he's blinkered and his skin in the game is making him this way. He's just not the type who could look at the stadium options objectively with his own cash (even though it's just debt, not cash) on the line.

To clarify, I don't believe Milne is there for the land or money these days, although I suspect that might have been the case 20 years ago. Neither can I ever prove it either way, so it's never an argument I'd be willing to get into. I just think that, whatever his motivations, his idea to move stadium to Westhill is a ridiculous one that has been deliberately mis-sold to the fans. The evidence is there to back that up. Milne should be no more than a custodian for the club, as should all chairmen - much like Budge at Hertz. It's a hugely privileged position in itself and making himself or his companies money should never come into decision making (again, I have no evidence to suggest it is). If you can't see there would be a problem with that, then I'm surprised. If an agenda is being pushed that isn't best for the club, its fans and its long term future, but good for the chairman and investors (the Donalds perhaps) then can you honestly say you wouldn't have a problem with that? If we were being offered several choices, Milne was open about the personal gains from each option, then I'd have no problem with mutual benefit existing but that clearly isn't the case here.

Brilliant article Manc, fantastic find.

I'd love to see yer workings on that. I'm pretty hot on the DIY, I'm certain I could eek out another 3 thoosan seats.

Really good point. If the stadium doesn't go ahead, I'd be more than happy for a 100M statue of Eoin Jess to take its place (I would have suggested Willie Miller, but I don't think we should give them our best player, the cunts). I don't want to be tarred with the cunt brush.

That's a pity, I'd had enough after the channel 4 one so didn't watch it. I'll get it on catch up. Outside their news team, BBC usually do some good stuff.