That Old Chestnut - Do We Move Or Do We Stay

[weeyin]

4 hours ago, Kmcalpin said:

I just wonder how the "upgrading" to seating in the POD fits in with our long  term stadium plans. Its been quite some time now since the Directors announced that they had commissioned, and received, a consultants' report on the pros and cons of moving to a new stadium. No doubt they have now digested and considered the contents.  

I thought the POD seat upgrades were a UEFA requirement for the Euro games. I don't think we'd have been able to build a new stadium by next week.

[dennyc]

37 minutes ago, weeyin said:

I thought the POD seat upgrades were a UEFA requirement for the Euro games. I don't think we'd have been able to build a new stadium by next week.

The bucket seats on the wings of the stand could not be used per Uefa. Apparently to be acceptable seats must have a back.  So they took the chance to change the lot. Sadly the word 'upgrade' is not appropriate. 

[Spiderpig]

3 hours ago, mio said:

If selling Watt enables me to get a recaro seat fitted in the POD then I’m all for it. Not that I want to sound selfish 😂

It would only be selfish if nobody else got them as well, re the new pod seats if the well shop started selling inflateable cushions they will do a roaring trade.

[El Grew]

3 minutes ago, Spiderpig said:

It would only be selfish if nobody else got them as well, re the new pod seats if the well shop started selling inflateable cushions they will do a roaring trade.

By the sound of some folks experience of the “new” seats in the POD stand, maybe the club should put a first aid kit under every one of them.

[Spiderpig]

1 hour ago, dennyc said:

The bucket seats on the wings of the stand could not be used per Uefa. Apparently to be acceptable seats must have a back.  So they took the chance to change the lot. Sadly the word 'upgrade' is not appropriate. 

All they had to do was fix some plywood to the back of the existing seat legs, some foam padding and paint, and the seats would have a back and be comfy and compliant, and no doubt a lot cheaper than the plastic tat we got.

[SteelmaninOZ]

The POD. Rebuild 

 

[Goggles & Flippers]

15 hours ago, Kmcalpin said:

I just wonder how the "upgrading" to seating in the POD fits in with our long  term stadium plans. Its been quite some time now since the Directors announced that they had commissioned, and received, a consultants' report on the pros and cons of moving to a new stadium. No doubt they have now digested and considered the contents. 

Clearly the current replacement of seats is a sticking plaster job, unfortunately literally, as well as metaphorically.  From early fan feedback it seems to have been mishandled in term of comfort and practicalities. I just wonder why this wasn't carried out a wee bit earlier? From online comments, it seems that our home capacity is being cut to around 7,500, if my understanding is correct. In saying that, I don't know if we can use the South Stand for home fans. If our crowd is limited then it could cost us some income over 1, hopefully 2 or more Euro games. Well into 5 figures in total. Presumably the project will be completed by our first home league game against Falkirk? 

Looking at the big picture, I do wonder if the POD will be replaced, as opposed to relocating to a new stadium. If so, the current seating "upgrade" looks like a budget, but still expensive, emergency measure to keep the POD on life support. 

A wee bit more transparency on this issue would have been welcome a month or two ago. Maybe when our European spot, and seating implications were confirmed? Better late than never though.   

I'm unsure what these reports give you in 2026. Now all anyone needs to do is visit their preferred AI engine, upload a number of background documents that give it context (our past five years of accounts, NLC development strategy, Ravenscraig masterplan, half a dozen news articles, stadium precedent studies, and a plethora of others) and it will spit something decent out, with graphs, projections and looking very professional. What you're paying for with a consultancy is their name and clout added to it.

Five years ago perhaps the fee could paid be justified and information contained would be pertinent because it would have needed true analysis and human endeavour.

Let's not overlook that in a subjective document that is open to so much interpretation and presumption, that any inference can be made to suit a narrative and most importantly sell a vision to the fanbase.

The events of two summers ago shows that a significant part of our fanbase have no interest in getting close to any weeds let alone get in amongst them.

I asked a question at the AGM ..... roughly went along the lines of due to the success of the team, we are looking at potentially realising a high seven-figure, possibly eight-figures of transfer revenue this summer. Does that change the thinking and direction of the board as to what we do next? Of course the answer was vague, obtuse and as secretive as we've came to expect of late.

On the face of it, staying and redeveloping seems the simplest option, even if it means a season or two of disruption and hit to income. However, due to the transfer receipts we're likely to realise, we're now potentially discussing projects that were previously beyond us. We've effectively gone from talking about financing a new POD to having the sort of deposit that allows you to seriously consider a mortgage on a new stadium. Personally, I'd prefer the latter as Fir Park will always be limiting to any aspirations, for a host of reasons although I suspect the equalisation of season ticket prices across the three home stands points towards the first part of the club ultimately remaining at Fir Park and mitigating moving punters to other stands.

However, you may want to look at it as Elijah Just and Lennon Miller effectively paying for two behind the goal stands, with Watt and Ward covering the training complex. That still allows JT's eventual income to go back into the football department.

One thing is certain, if we redevelop FP or embark on something new, if we go less than a 13,000 capacity of which 5,000 is accessible to away fans, then we can't maintain our current financial planning and projected incomes. That is, unless our home support grows to a regular 7-7,500.

As I outlined in the presentation @Kmcalpin covered way back, if for example we increase our capacity in a new stadium to 16,000 and give up those extra 3,000 to the OF/Hearts, over a 20 year mortgage we'd earn close to £8m just for those extra 3,000 seats from what FP currently holds. 3,000 extra seats allows us to maintain our current business model and pay off another stand. Increase to 19,000 capacity, it's all covered if done modestly, the trade off is hosting the ugly sisters means there is an 11,000 to 7,000 imbalance when we are the home team, but those extra 6,000 with their green and blue pounds buy us a fair bit of a stadium for 'free'. Things get tricky if we are relegated and don't bounce back up, but as we enter our 44th? season in the top flight then.

Just trying to simply the above to make the concept sink in. There would be of course groundworks, new 5% plastic pitch, professional fees, contingencies and cost overruns all projects have attached.

For me it's simple. Make the space(s) multi-use and able to be used 24-7/365 and monetise it, make it a destination venue in Scottish football, offer something truly unique and lower our current maintenance costs. Good design can enhance atmosphere which is a big reason people are wary of moves along with debt saddled to the club. An innovative approach at conception can address all of these fears.