Loirston chosen for new stadium

Aberdeen FC set to move

EXCLUSIVE

By Charlie Allan

 

Published: 03/04/2009

 

THE Evening Express can today reveal the preferred location for Aberdeen’s new community stadium.

 

The £38 million community facility, which will become home to Aberdeen FC, will be at Loirston Loch in the south of the city.

 

It follows a year-long series of feasibility studies to decide if the site at Nigg would be the best location for the stadium.

 

The report on the recommendation of the Nigg site will now go out to consultation and will be referred to the council’s policy and strategy committee on April 28.

 

A number of other potential sites across the city, including one at King’s Links, were examined by Aberdeen City Council and Aberdeen FC and it was decided all of them were unsuitable.

 

Aberdeen FC managing director Duncan Fraser, who is also a member of the Arena Project Advisory and Monitoring Board created to advise of the best site and stadium design, said: “These recommendations have still to be approved and at the appropriate time, there will be a full consultation process with fans.

 

“Their feedback will be important.â€

 

For more on this story, and an exclusive image of the new arena, pick up today’s Evening Express or check back later

I'll go to their stupid new stadium....IF....The Masada put on a regular bus which will take me at a decent time to the game and then take me back with the minimum of fuss or delay, and IF they don't put the bloody prices up.

Just under half of the seats at Kingsford are not being put in place for 'fans'.

 

They are being put in place for seagulls and scruffy pidgeons to shite on, as lets face it, there is no chance of the club getting more than 11,000 most weeks!

There won't be that much traffic, noise and disruption then.

The evidence would suggest otherwise, but £30m of debt certainly will not help the club.

The evidence would suggest otherwise, but £30m of debt certainly will not help the club.

 

What is your proposal to resolve the stadium issue?

 

What is your proposal to resolve the stadium issue?

 

  Have been meaning to ask the same thing.Havnt heard much in the way of alternatives....

Didn't say that, but drinkers are in the minority, and you don't *have* to drink. When I stayed in the city, I drank, now I'm outside again I don't. Hard to believe, but it's not compulsory.

 

 

Which isn't many people, and they can get on the ample buses provided

 

 

There's a ton of parking, both at the stadium, Arnhall, and other areas that will undoubtedly open up.

 

 

nope

 

Drinkers are in the minority.

 

DST survey said 55% visit bars or restaurants prior to a home match and 25% occasionally.

 

The yes support is based on no facts, no reality and blind faith in Yule Coaches which covers 2 roads and 13 buses. 

Just under half of the seats at Kingsford are not being put in place for 'fans'.

 

They are being put in place for seagulls and scruffy pidgeons to shite on

 

I didn't know that.  That's a really lovely gesture by the club to support the local wildlife. 

  Have been meaning to ask the same thing.Havnt heard much in the way of alternatives....

 

The club have done a lot to try and 'resolve' the stadium issue. Plan A, Plan B and Plan C.

 

Plans are the responsibility of the club to deliver, project manage it to success and plan it out properly.

 

The club have not planned Plan C 'Kingsford' properly - it is a catastrophic muck up of titanic proportion well on the way to being binned.

 

It is a mere 'throw of the dice'.

 

Plan D Phase 1 should be concentrating on getting a training pitch for the players to train on in a stable environment and Plan D (Phase 2) should be redeveloping our home in an inventive way via a form of proper financing just as every other club have managed to do including Hearts (who 2 years ago were in financial ruin).

 

No need for 4 brilliant stands.  You need 3 lumps of concrete with roofs, seats and concourses and 1 stand with all facilities.  See Tynecastle.

 

Certainly not some inaccessible, soulless legoland monstrosity & white elephant that is not even in Aberdeen!

 

 

What is your proposal to resolve the stadium issue?

 

 

Plan D (Phase 2) should be redeveloping our home in an inventive way via a form of proper financing

 

there is you answer Tom, if only AFC had thought of it first 

The club have done a lot to try and 'resolve' the stadium issue. Plan A, Plan B and Plan C.

 

Plans are the responsibility of the club to deliver, project manage it to success and plan it out properly.

 

The club have not planned Plan C 'Kingsford' properly - it is a catastrophic muck up of titanic proportion well on the way to being binned.

 

It is a mere 'throw of the dice'.

 

Plan D Phase 1 should be concentrating on getting a training pitch for the players to train on in a stable environment and Plan D (Phase 2) should be redeveloping our home in an inventive way via a form of proper financing just as every other club have managed to do including Hearts (who 2 years ago were in financial ruin).

 

No need for 4 brilliant stands.  You need 3 lumps of concrete with roofs, seats and concourses and 1 stand with all facilities.  See Tynecastle.

 

Certainly not some inaccessible, soulless legoland monstrosity & white elephant that is not even in Aberdeen!

 

"The reason we have a bigger playing budget than Hearts despite them usually getting more fans through the gates is because their corporate facilities are sorely lacking. Aberdeen can improve further on our own corporate facilities at a new stadium"

 

Derek McInnes.

"The reason we have a bigger playing budget than Hearts despite them usually getting more fans through the gates is because their corporate facilities are sorely lacking. Aberdeen can improve further on our own corporate facilities at a new stadium"

 

Derek McInnes.

 

The problem with quoting McInnes on this subject should be obvious; he's paid to manage the football side of the business. He doesn't have any qualifications or experience in business to business nor does he have a crystal ball to predict the value of corporate hospitality packages at a new stadium/venue/location. He has seemingly done his due diligence and conducted a full review of another club's commercial activities...

 

or he's a typical human being and offering rhetoric that his boss would be proud of. They call it arselicking.

More importantly, where does that end? All corporate seats? An entire stand devoted to corporate?

 

There's something a bit vacuous about that statement. Arse-licking is probably appropriate, I'd agree. Not necessarily just boss' airse, but at least those of a certain degree of wealth. Basically, the equivalent of the pandering shout out to our "gold club members" that you get on airplanes. We couldn't be where we were today if it weren't for the rich types who turn up to our games once a season in a suit.

 

I enjoy a bit of corporate now and again, don't get me wrong. I'm certainly not suggesting that we remove corporate. But the statement stinks of a sales pitch for the new stadium, and undermines the normal ticketed supporter. It doesn't discuss a percentage of stadium/seat coverage or any other useful measure, nor does it seem to be backed by evidence (it could be, it just hasn't been provided).

 

It also ignores the take-up of corporate at Pittodrie. I think anyone that's been would agree that - despite the state of Pittodrie - the RDS corporate is just as good as you'd expect at a new stadium. Yet, I have been offered in recent seasons (even under McInnes) the chance to take up a corporate table that has not been otherwise filled. This suggests there is a saturation point at which corporate is not only not necessary, but a drain on resource and wasted space, much like our general attendances.

 

The bland "corporate is better" doesn't really count for much without some figures behind it. Nor does it count for anything without the accompanying 12,000 seater design, showing how much corporate we'd be losing or, conversely, how much general seating we'd lose because of corporate. Not to mention the fact that there are two types of corporate: box and general seated. It'd be very interesting to see the margin between the two.

For your information 'Tyrant' I have better things to do with my time than contribute daily to your pathetic online  forum.

Although I may well come back on June 20th when ACC reject Kingsford.  Just to rub your faces in the abject failure of it all.

 

Erm AK100%  Seems you dont have anything better to do. Why dont you take a wander, and see if you can find a new home for the soon to be displaced deer you seemed so concerned about?

More importantly, where does that end? All corporate seats? An entire stand devoted to corporate?

 

There's something a bit vacuous about that statement. Arse-licking is probably appropriate, I'd agree. Not necessarily just boss' airse, but at least those of a certain degree of wealth. Basically, the equivalent of the pandering shout out to our "gold club members" that you get on airplanes. We couldn't be where we were today if it weren't for the rich types who turn up to our games once a season in a suit.

 

I enjoy a bit of corporate now and again, don't get me wrong. I'm certainly not suggesting that we remove corporate. But the statement stinks of a sales pitch for the new stadium, and undermines the normal ticketed supporter. It doesn't discuss a percentage of stadium/seat coverage or any other useful measure, nor does it seem to be backed by evidence (it could be, it just hasn't been provided).

 

It also ignores the take-up of corporate at Pittodrie. I think anyone that's been would agree that - despite the state of Pittodrie - the RDS corporate is just as good as you'd expect at a new stadium. Yet, I have been offered in recent seasons (even under McInnes) the chance to take up a corporate table that has not been otherwise filled. This suggests there is a saturation point at which corporate is not only not necessary, but a drain on resource and wasted space, much like our general attendances.

 

The bland "corporate is better" doesn't really count for much without some figures behind it. Nor does it count for anything without the accompanying 12,000 seater design, showing how much corporate we'd be losing or, conversely, how much general seating we'd lose because of corporate. Not to mention the fact that there are two types of corporate: box and general seated. It'd be very interesting to see the margin between the two.

 

The club want to make 'more money' from corporate facilities at Kingsford.

 

Aye.  But certainly £30m blown on a mortgage for this new place is not going to help Derek McInnes buy better players.

 

I enjoy a bit of corporate now and again, don't get me wrong. I'm certainly not suggesting that we remove corporate. But the statement stinks of a sales pitch for the new stadium, and undermines the normal ticketed supporter. It doesn't discuss a percentage of stadium/seat coverage or any other useful measure, nor does it seem to be backed by evidence (it could be, it just hasn't been provided).

 

It also ignores the take-up of corporate at Pittodrie. I think anyone that's been would agree that - despite the state of Pittodrie - the RDS corporate is just as good as you'd expect at a new stadium. Yet, I have been offered in recent seasons (even under McInnes) the chance to take up a corporate table that has not been otherwise filled. This suggests there is a saturation point at which corporate is not only not necessary, but a drain on resource and wasted space, much like our general attendances.

 

I seem to remember from the various exhibitions etc that the quantity of the corporate facilities proposed isn't much more than currently  offered however Yule etc made a point of saying it was designed to be much better laid out, I.e all corporate sections can share facilities such as kitchens etc, which isn't the case just now. So the boost to corporate income would be more down to efficiency savings rather than increased numbers.

 

Agree the corporate offering in the RDS is very good, the main stand wasn't great last time I went with work but hardly awful.

 

Agree they shouldn't go over the top with corporate facilities to the detriment of the standard tickets although in fairness it doesn't look like they have.

  Have been meaning to ask the same thing.Havnt heard much in the way of alternatives....

 

Buy Rubislaw Quarry.

Corporate facilities doesn't just mean matchday hospitality - Pittodrie has 9 conference rooms/suites that the club rent out throughout the week for conferences, functions, weddings etc.

 

It's a revenue stream that provides significant additional income from the stadium outside of matchdays, and that the club are looking to maximise/expand on with the new stadium.  Seems sensible to me.

 

http://www.afc.co.uk/commercial/facilities.php

 

http://www.afc.co.uk/commercial/conferences.php

 

 

Corporate facilities doesn't just mean matchday hospitality - Pittodrie has 9 conference rooms/suites that the club rent out throughout the week for conferences, functions, weddings etc.

 

It's a revenue stream that provides significant additional income from the stadium outside of matchdays, and that the club are looking to maximise/expand on with the new stadium.  Seems sensible to me.

 

http://www.afc.co.uk/commercial/facilities.php

 

http://www.afc.co.uk/commercial/conferences.php

 

Exactly, spot on.

 

They can use income from shirt and tie hospitality events to pay back the £30-£40m mortgage on bloody costs to build feckin place!

Exactly, spot on.

 

They can use income from shirt and tie hospitality events to pay back the £30-£40m mortgage on bloody costs to build feckin place!

 

Yes, I believe that is the plan, although the mortgage would be approximately half that due to the sale of Pittodrie, and weekday corporate hosting would only be one of several revenue streams, the other main ones being merchandising, sponsorship, season tickets, matchday income, and prize money.

 

What's your point again?

The point is that the club are playing in the Scottish Premier League.  A very small league, with very narrow income streams.

 

There is no big pool of corporate talent or companies in Aberdeen and the NE ready to invest pots of cash in the club to any extent significantly higher than is current.

 

As has been noted in the various consultant explorations and papers benefits of the stadium have been over stated aside from construction jobs during build.  There will be 2 astro pitches for use by locals - cost of maintanence will be higher than income in.

 

The prospect of these great corporate leaps forward with Kingsford is another item of propaganda invented by the club executive to justify the build.  SPL simply does not have the finances around it.

 

Scottish football is Scottish football not English Premiership.  Aberdeen FC have no chance of the Champions league and Europa League groups are some way off.

 

There is no big incomes fron average stock SPL games.  To state that a move to Kingsford will provide some injection of big corporate finance 'inward' is rubbish and delusional.

 

Of course you might sell a few more tables but that is hardly going to bring in millions is it?

I think that vastly over-estimates the ability to pull in corporate visitors. Most offices have the ability to hold small events, with larger ones being hosted in hotels. You get the occasional business breakfast, sales seminar type deal etc. but surely this can't be a huge market? More correctly, surely they've reached saturation point with the existing facilities and they can't expect to get a massive increase in revenue from the stadium move? It seems to me like one of those selling points for the new stadium that isn't really a selling point. Like the sale of Pittodrie, or the training facilities.

Lets face it.

 

The club have no cash for a new stadium.  £0.

 

They have assets of £20m approx valuation supposedly which they will sell in order to finance £48m approx for this new place.

 

That is the plan, the vision, the mandate for change. Its a vision - nothing more.

 

To support that mandate for change they have outlined all this massive benefits the new stadium will bring including this of 'increased corporate revenue income streams'.

 

From where are these income streams coming - Google and Microsoft or Mikes Window Cleaning Ltd from Peterhead?

 

We are Aberdeen FC, a proud club a local club.  The club have positioned this project as a means of keeping pace with the rest of Europe.

 

But we have long since not been amongst the best in Europe - that was in 1982-1985.

 

We are a small player in a small league which lacks strategic direction and is heavily weighted in favour of huge clubs from Glasgow which dominate TV and game.  We are already punching well above our weight by playing in Europe and in semi finals and for finals.

 

A lot of people seem to forget that we play in SPL - not the Premiership, not La Liga, not Serie A.  Scottish premier League - a very small pool, very small income streams controlled by a mess of incompetent people who lack vision and direction.

 

Just whom are they trying to con?

Buy Rubislaw Quarry.

 

And do what exactly?

And do what exactly?

Bury 100% AK there?