donsdaft Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 Home Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garlogie_Granite Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 Home Can't be denied. But, how many homes have you had? Look, the Wiggy Dome will be walking distance for me, I'm a' for it #selfinterest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donsdaft Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 I suppose the best I can hope for is that it's delayed for ten years. Sounds unlikely but ten years ago we could have been having the same conversation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RicoS321 Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 Pittodrie: *Shite location to get to except for those walking *Terrible parking *Caul as fuck and not all covered *Nae training facilites for the players The first is plain wrong, it's 1.2 miles from the train station and based pretty close to the centre of the city the team plays in, it would be difficult to get a better location. There are also buses from Masada, KGB etc. Parking is fine from South and West of the city, but North is a pain in the hoop. I came from Torry for a recent home game at 14:40 and was parked and in the ground by 14:55. Tims game aside, there is plenty parking. Also, if you're willing to walk for ten minutes after the game, it's equally fine. Most importantly, and it's the point that always gets overlooked in these new stadium pitches, is the point that all of the majority of new stadium transport suggestions could also happen in the current location. A park and ride at the new AECC for example, buses from the train station as touted by the new stadium proposal could all happen now, but we don't do it. There is nothing specific about a new stadium that means these options are any more valid. You're ignoring that evidence. The point about cover is irrelevant. If we are raising £25M, then we can address the stand covering issue. I don't believe for a second that the architect types on here (you know who you are) think that they couldn't anything at all with £25M to make Pittodrie a cracking, comfortable ground (not as easily as a new ground obviously). It just requires basic imagination and a little will power. The point being that the options are not "build a stadium" or "do nothing", they are "build a stadium" or "raise that money and spend it differently". Jesus, if we're making points about the new stadium, can we at least remove the ones that have nothing to do with a new stadium? It'd make the argument a lot simpler. Again, the training facility is not predicated on a new stadium (hence our various planning arrangement over the years). It's a totally different project, and there's absolutely no valid reason at all for it to be in the same location as the stadium as is proven by the majority of clubs in world football. In short, look at the benefits of the new stadium objectively and weigh up whether they are benefits that are predicated on their being a new stadium or not and then weigh up the remainder of those benefits against moving away from Pittodrie. Here's some benefits that are not predicated on moving (i.e. they can be achieved easily in the current location): - Mortgage - Naming rights - Share issue - Coach services/Improved transport links to the game - New training facilities - Repair costs for current stadium - Covered stands in current stadium - Supporters' bar - Better facilities - Improved catering options All of the above can be addressed in situ, funded by the first three on the list if required. Not to suggest in any way that it would be easy, just possible within our budget (that budget being the one designated for the new stadium less sale of Pittodrie for clarification). Here are some remaining benefits of the new stadium that can only be achieved by moving: - easier for me to get to - easier access via bypass from North and South (in theory, parking arrangements, speedy exit tbc) - easier to design and build - better looking stadium (more uniform) - in theory, more atmospheric - initial wave/increase of support for the new shiny thing (not to be under-estimated) Hopefully you guys can add more and help persuade likes of me that I'm wrong. I think these are the obvious ones, and I've not tried to be deliberately pro-Pittodrie. Unfortunately the argument keeps getting framed incorrectly which leads to my obvious frustration. Ye dicks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tamzarian Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 Fuck Westhill, fucking boo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyrant Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 I still remain firmly in the "I don't want a new stadium" camp. Aye Pittodrie is a ball hair away from derelict but that's because we've deliberately not maintained it because "we're moving to a new stadium soon anyway". That's a fact. I heard it in person straight from the horse's mouth. But clearly enough time has now passed for most of you to have forgotten that and accepted (as was the intention) that we now "need" to move. We don't. Rico has covered in great detail the alternatives. But if we do that Stewarty doesn't get his luxury flats near the city centre built. Pittodrie has a shite atmosphere most of the time but in a new stadium it'll be worse. I'll sound like a broken record here but how many new stadiums have a better atmosphere than their predecessors? Brockville --> The Falkirk Stadium. The fucking lego arena in Livingston. (Gads) Highbury --> The Emirates. Maine Road --> Etihad. Struggling to think of a single one where the atmosphere hasn't noticeably suffered. Although maybe there are one or two exceptions. I'm not a fan of football clubs moving out of their cities. We've got a cracking location currently. Many people can walk. Far less people will be able to walk now. Aye there's traffic congestion after games but that's something that's not that fucking difficult or costly to sort. We just don't do it because we're stuck in the status quo. Westhill may well be easier to get to once the bypass is in place etc but it may not be. There's too much guesswork going on. (Although seeing all the ignorant pricks that live near Westhill shitting themselves about "20,000 hooligans on the rampage every saturday outside their homes" makes me want to build it myself just to get it up them. Half-wits. The bottom line is that we're being pushed to a new stadium for the financial gain of a few and that shouldn't ever be acceptable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RicoS321 Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 Although seeing all the ignorant pricks that leave near Westhill shitting themselves about "20,000 hooligans on the rampage every saturday outside their homes" makes me want to build it myself just to get it up them. Half-wits. 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garlogie_Granite Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 But if we do that Stewarty doesn't get his luxury flats near the city centre built. You'd written a long post there, which I was reading through to see what you had to say, then I reached this, and realised you are just a dribbling drooler. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom_widdows Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 The point about cover is irrelevant. If we are raising £25M, then we can address the stand covering issue. I don't believe for a second that the architect types on here (you know who you are) think that they couldn't anything at all with £25M to make Pittodrie a cracking, comfortable ground (not as easily as a new ground obviously). It just requires basic imagination and a little will power. The point being that the options are not "build a stadium" or "do nothing", they are "build a stadium" or "raise that money and spend it differently". Pittodrie can quite easily be redeveloped in stages (funding dependent). The issue is 3 new stands designed to current regulations will not provide the 15,405 seats the current South, Main & Merkland provide. Sticking with the 4 stand layout I estimate the new capacity would be max 15000. A possible alternative of changing to a 2 stand layout (Braga Style) by rotating the pitch 90degreess could possibly bring 20,000 however it would be expensive as fuck (and thats assuming it would be possible to extend the RDS), Probably end up in legal fights over 'daylighting' issues to the surrounding houses, and even require a ground-share arrangement with the Dundee Clubs for at least part of a season. Also I haven't been to Braga but I presume they don't have North Sea style winds whistling through the open end. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RicoS321 Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 Sticking with the 4 stand layout I estimate the new capacity would be max 15000. 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obanred Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 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. Safe standind will see to the missing 3000 seats . BTW, is the aforementioned included in the planning application?? Would be stupid not to have it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manc_don Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 Safe standind will see to the missing 3000 seats . BTW, is the aforementioned included in the planning application?? Would be stupid not to have it. It wasn't, I think someone asked the club on twitter and they said that they'd amend the application if it was necessary (i.e. see how the giro dome works out). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyrant Posted January 18, 2017 Share Posted January 18, 2017 You'd written a long post there, which I was reading through to see what you had to say, then I reached this, and realised you are just a dribbling drooler. So we're not moving to a new stadium purely for the financial gain of a few? And Stewarty isn't one of those few? And I'm the "dribbling drooler"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manc_don Posted January 18, 2017 Share Posted January 18, 2017 So we're not moving to a new stadium purely for the financial gain of a few? And Stewarty isn't one of those few? And I'm the "dribbling drooler"? Well, you do like Coldplay after all Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edinburghdon Posted January 18, 2017 Share Posted January 18, 2017 So we're not moving to a new stadium purely for the financial gain of a few? And Stewarty isn't one of those few? And I'm the "dribbling drooler"? Milne could well be... its not a given that he would be able to buy the pittodrie site for flats though. Same goes with the contract to build the new stadium, I'd expect both deals would have to be done completely by the book. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donsdaft Posted January 18, 2017 Share Posted January 18, 2017 Who would want to buy a flat down there anyway? They'd have me standing in the garden shouting " come on ye reds" every time the Dons had a home game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garlogie_Granite Posted January 18, 2017 Share Posted January 18, 2017 So we're not moving to a new stadium purely for the financial gain of a few? And Stewarty isn't one of those few? And I'm the "dribbling drooler"? So, let me get this right, Wiggy has taken all the grief at Pittodrie for near 25 years, ploughed his own money in at times to pay wages or whatnot, all so that eventually he can get his hands on a bit of not at all prime land in Linksfield? You really think that's the plan? Utter nonsense min. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocket_scientist Posted January 18, 2017 Share Posted January 18, 2017 So, let me get this right, Wiggy has taken all the grief at Pittodrie for near 25 years, ploughed his own money in at times to pay wages or whatnot, all so that eventually he can get his hands on a bit of not at all prime land in Linksfield? You really think that's the plan? Utter nonsense min. What money has he "ploughed" in? How much did he pay for his 28%? Shut the fuck up when you know fuck all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elgindon Posted January 18, 2017 Share Posted January 18, 2017 Ahve no time for Milne,but being the owner of a football club has never been a way to make money RS. Whats Milne got or getting out of his involvement.Nae sure what Milnes ploughed in,but I know AAM put in a couple of million they didnt get back If its a case of doing up Pittodrie for eg £25m,or, getting X£m for the land at Pittodrie, plus the £25m towards a purpose built stadium,whats the problem(assuming the X£m goes to the stadium)?. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garlogie_Granite Posted January 18, 2017 Share Posted January 18, 2017 What money has he "ploughed" in? How much did he pay for his 28%? Shut the fuck up when you know fuck all. It's well known he's paid personally for various things over the years. But, even if he hadn't, the amount of time he's ploughed into being AFC Chairman would have been more productively spent on his business rather than some long term lifetime plan to get his hands on some shite land. It makes no sense to anyone thinking it through for 30 seconds. And no need to be so rude. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edinburghdon Posted January 18, 2017 Share Posted January 18, 2017 It's well known he's paid personally for various things over the years. But, even if he hadn't, the amount of time he's ploughed into being AFC Chairman would have been more productively spent on his business rather than some long term lifetime plan to get his hands on some shite land. It makes no sense to anyone thinking it through for 30 seconds. And no need to be so rude. I hate to break it to you, but with that common sense point you've just opened yourself up to what could be a lifetime of angry obsessive ranting. My condolences Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RicoS321 Posted January 18, 2017 Share Posted January 18, 2017 Ahve no time for Milne,but being the owner of a football club has never been a way to make money RS. Whats Milne got or getting out of his involvement. If its a case of doing up Pittodrie for eg £25m,or, getting X£m for the land at Pittodrie, plus the £25m towards a purpose built stadium,whats the problem(assuming the X£m goes to the stadium)?. 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RicoS321 Posted January 18, 2017 Share Posted January 18, 2017 It's well known he's paid personally for various things over the years. But, even if he hadn't, the amount of time he's ploughed into being AFC Chairman would have been more productively spent on his business rather than some long term lifetime plan to get his hands on some shite land. It makes no sense to anyone thinking it through for 30 seconds. 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garlogie_Granite Posted January 18, 2017 Share Posted January 18, 2017 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. I can accept that alternative line of thought. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocket_scientist Posted January 18, 2017 Share Posted January 18, 2017 Garlogie min. I've never had a problem with you before. As you know. Nor will I ever have a problem with you in the future, if we both want the best for AFC. Which I know you want as much as I do. It's ok if we have different experiences and opinions. I just HATE the false rhetoric that surrounds Milne. False shite that nothing human beings buy into. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Germany v 
Scotland - kick-off 8pm
Germany v Scotland - kick-off 8pm
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.