harry94 Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 48 minutes ago, Bully Wee Villa said: It does seem a bit silly that the SFA are basically giving an amateur side the best part of a million quid a year. That money could be better invested in improving Scottish football elsewhere. It's £300k a year for a stadium + office space that the SFA then let out to several other organisations and then likely make a profit from it. This also goes towards paying off a significant proportion of the liabilities in which Queen's Park took on when the redevelopment was agreed. I don't really see how an alternative of renting elsewhere is really going to save a huge amount of money or see it then directed to the right place. It really is a pittance to begin with. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurkst Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 11 minutes ago, gannonball said: Not the worst idea IF it means Hampden gets redeveloped.Surely Queens fans would prefer playing at a redeveloped lesser Hampden than at Hampden? If you could watch the game from the social club it would be excellent 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bully Wee Villa Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 It's £300k a year for a stadium + office space that the SFA then let out to several other organisations and then likely make a profit from it. This also goes towards paying off a significant proportion of the liabilities in which Queen's Park took on when the redevelopment was agreed. I don't really see how an alternative of renting elsewhere is really going to save a huge amount of money or see it then directed to the right place. It really is a pittance to begin with. I was talking from the perspective of if they stay, clearly if they move to Murrayfield some rent will be required. If QP agree to sell up, the cost saved in rent will come to outweigh the initial outlay fairly quickly.How many does Lesser Hampden hold, out of curiosity? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Fifer Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 42 minutes ago, Bully Wee Villa said: I was talking from the perspective of if they stay, clearly if they move to Murrayfield some rent will be required. If QP agree to sell up, the cost saved in rent will come to outweigh the initial outlay fairly quickly. How many does Lesser Hampden hold, out of curiosity? I don't think it's that huge in terms of seats. Capacity was huge when it was first opened but I think that was because it was mainly standing space. Can't seem to find a figure online, but from memory of walking past it there was only the one seating area that maybe held 500-750? Hopefully someone else who knows better can step in... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bully Wee Villa Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 That would be pretty difficult to get tickets if they were playing Clyde then. I think we usually have more fans at Hampden than at home games. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurkst Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 20 minutes ago, Bully Wee Villa said: That would be pretty difficult to get tickets if they were playing Clyde then. I think we usually have more fans at Hampden than at home games. You'd think an agreement could be reached to let Queens use the main stadium if the extra capacity was needed?... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Fifer Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 (edited) There might be standing/terracing that I've just not paid attention to when I've passed, I've usually had a number of beverages by the time I'm near Hampden. ETA - Had a scan through some photos online, seating looks way less than my 500 figure. Looks plenty space round the pitch for standing, which could well be redeveloped into something a bit more professional looking with proper terracing. Bit of a tough one for Queens, only their fans could answer what they think would be best for them here, I'd imagine it's the rent option. Obviously the rest of us think it's silly our SFA paying a lower league side to use their facilities, but then that's the thing, it's still their facilities. Edited February 22, 2018 by Big Fifer 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 4 hours ago, Ross. said: I predicted on here a few months ago that this is what their plan was. Makes sense but the way they have gone about it is shameful. These transparet fuckers should be rounded up and jailed Months of driving down the value, then coming in with an "offer". The whole organisation would make you sick. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DA Baracus Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 (edited) As part of any offer the SFA should pay for the redevelopment of Lesser Hampden for Queen's Park as required for league football, as well as ensuring that Queen's Park own it outright. Edited February 22, 2018 by DA Baracus 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Henry Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 5 hours ago, Ross. said: I predicted on here a few months ago that this is what their plan was. Makes sense but the way they have gone about it is shameful. It some ways it makes a lot of sense, as clearly Queens Park are in no position to upgrade. If they refuse to sell, then Murrayfield it is. I am glad to see the SFA realise that the stadium is currently not fit for purpose, though. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick1867 Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 (edited) 4 hours ago, gannonball said: Not the worst idea IF it means Hampden gets redeveloped.Surely Queens fans would prefer playing at a redeveloped lesser Hampden than at Hampden? They might want Lesser as part of the deal so we'd have to look elsewhere ( back to Cathkin?) We don't really have a choice now. I hear that if we don't sell them the ground then they are going to Murrayfield and we would be taking a massive risk financially if we then take on all the current debts of the ground in the hope that it would be outweighed by any sale of the land. If the place is no longer used as a National Stadium then we have a proportion of the Lottery money to pay back as well as refunding Debenture scheme holders. I now see it as a great chance for us to re-model ourselves and play at a ground and a level suitable for a club of our size. Could be the choice of turning semi-pro or ending up in the Lowland league (playing at Hampden was always an attraction for players ) Edited February 22, 2018 by Mick1867 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick1867 Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 1 hour ago, DA Baracus said: As part of any offer the SFA should pay for the redevelopment of Lesser Hampden for Queen's Park as required for league football, as well as ensuring that Queen's Park own it outright. That's what the club are wanting to happen, all part of the ongoing negotiations with the SFA . It will need plenty of work done to bring it up to league standard. We could go for the one stand like East Fife and Dumbarton or the two like Stirling Albion. Maybe one stand with a terracing behind the goal like Ochilview, that would be my choice. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DA Baracus Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 5 minutes ago, Mick1867 said: That's what the club are wanting to happen, all part of the ongoing negotiations with the SFA . It will need plenty of work done to bring it up to league standard. We could go for the one stand like East Fife and Dumbarton or the two like Stirling Albion. Maybe one stand with a terracing behind the goal like Ochilview, that would be my choice. You don't even really need terracing behind the goal as you could instead have an area like Peterhead do 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Fifer Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 11 minutes ago, Mick1867 said: That's what the club are wanting to happen, all part of the ongoing negotiations with the SFA . It will need plenty of work done to bring it up to league standard. We could go for the one stand like East Fife and Dumbarton or the two like Stirling Albion. Maybe one stand with a terracing behind the goal like Ochilview, that would be my choice. You absolutely do not want a one stand effort. Our stadium is fucking awful. On a separate note, what's the general fan's view on Queens Parks amateur status? Is it part of the reason that attracted you to support the club? Is it an important part of the clubs identity that you wouldn't want to give up? I know the brief history of it but it's always struck me as a bit weird. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASSANDMOVE Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 4 hours ago, gannonball said: Not the worst idea IF it means Hampden gets redeveloped.Surely Queens fans would prefer playing at a redeveloped lesser Hampden than at Hampden? I would but I'am not a voting member of the club - a redeveloped Lesser for me. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASSANDMOVE Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 33 minutes ago, Big Fifer said: You absolutely do not want a one stand effort. Our stadium is fucking awful. On a separate note, what's the general fan's view on Queens Parks amateur status? Is it part of the reason that attracted you to support the club? Is it an important part of the clubs identity that you wouldn't want to give up? I know the brief history of it but it's always struck me as a bit weird. A family thing for me, my grand father played for QP and has been in the family ever since. Like some of my fellow supporters, the minority however, I think without the draw of Hampden we wont attract the same calibre of players and should go semi-pro. I'm 57 now and over the years I've enjoyed in the fact were different (Amateur) but this could be the opportunity to move on. Also we lost our Elite status (a few years ago) with regard to our older youth teams and don't have the same quality coming through ie Douglas, Robertson and Shankland etc so we cant really on that conveyer belt we had coming through. Incidently, our current 20's are good but not the above level. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick1867 Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 38 minutes ago, PASSANDMOVE said: I would but I'am not a voting member of the club - a redeveloped Lesser for me. It's an absolute no-brainer imo and that was aslo the opinion of the vast majority at the meeting last night, although there was no official vote. The only option is selling the ground and us not playing there. That's their deal breaker. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick1867 Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 57 minutes ago, Big Fifer said: You absolutely do not want a one stand effort. Our stadium is fucking awful. On a separate note, what's the general fan's view on Queens Parks amateur status? Is it part of the reason that attracted you to support the club? Is it an important part of the clubs identity that you wouldn't want to give up? I know the brief history of it but it's always struck me as a bit weird. Started supporting them because they are my local club. I grew up about 100 yards from the ground and was also ball boy in the early 80s . The amateur status didn't play a part in my decision at all, although I grew to love it as well as all the associated history. Turning semi-pro wouldn't be an issue at all for me if it was financially viable and the right decision for the club. If not and we end up playing at a lower level then so be it. As long as I still have a football club to follow every week 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 3 hours ago, Savage Henry said: It some ways it makes a lot of sense, as clearly Queens Park are in no position to upgrade. If they refuse to sell, then Murrayfield it is. I am glad to see the SFA realise that the stadium is currently not fit for purpose, though. QP should sell it to the highest bidder and tell the SFA to go and take a running fùck. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Henry Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 QP should sell it to the highest bidder and tell the SFA to go and take a running fùck. The Irish FA, perhaps. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.