Sons' sorrow

[BallochSonsFan]

There are things that you'd want to see addressed if we're staying. The dip isn't great but would be potentially costly to fix. Floodlights are an issue. The general state of the ground is an issue. Getting more from the existing facilities would be an issue. Could we remodel the existing site to give us the option of increasing revenues without moving?

Ultimately if the council want us gone then what we can do is very limited but the current ground certainly needs a degree of investment

[The Moonster]

21 minutes ago, Mr X said:

Ooft, thats not good either.

I have to say, though, having been their many times its in a much better state than plenty of other grounds. What else needs done apart from the floodlights - which would be a fair cost on its own, of course

As Silverton End has said, there is a bit of an issue with the land at the far end near the water, I believe there is some contamination there too. All round it's just being left to rot away at the moment as it feeds the agenda of moving us.

 

[Silverton End]

Yes, we are currently "in the way" and obstructing WDC's planned new waterfront walkway re-development, which'll stretch from the former Ballantines distillery site to the Castle.

It's a rum-do, right enough.

[Homer Thompson]

19 minutes ago, Silverton End said:

The dip, at the away end of the pitch, near the river, where it used to be a Dock within Denny's Shipyard, it's sinking. The place generally needs a right good jetwash too.

 

14 minutes ago, The Moonster said:

As Silverton End has said, there is a bit of an issue with the land at the far end near the water, I believe there is some contamination there too. All round it's just being left to rot away at the moment as it feeds the agenda of moving us.

 

The slope is noticeable but its no worse than other grounds. Of course, if its getting worse or contaminated thats a different, and costly, matter

Worrying times, lets hope it all works out

[O'Kelly Isley III]

10 minutes ago, The Moonster said:

As Silverton End has said, there is a bit of an issue with the land at the far end near the water, I believe there is some contamination there too. All round it's just being left to rot away at the moment as it feeds the agenda of moving us.

 

It's certainly looking that way and the post-truth mantra about 'bad neighbours' is part of the same agenda; other than verbal claims by the Brabco people, I know of no firm evidence of this, and they were careful not to be drawn on it last night.

Although the CIS stadium is likely to be doomed under a quid-pro-quo arrangement between WDC and Brabco, another point that wasn't aired last night was that the walkway from the quay to the Rock CAN in fact be realised without encroaching on the football ground; indeed we must assume that unless said walkway isn't going to feature its own dip that this issue would need addressed anyway, so why not seek the win-win for both parties ?

I'll tell you why, because nether party has a shred of interest in seeing the CIS survive.  We must therefore prepare to gird our loins for the Renton Road battle.

[Silverton End]

1 minute ago, O'Kelly Isley III said:

It's certainly looking that way and the post-truth mantra about 'bad neighbours' is part of the same agenda; other than verbal claims by the Brabco people, I know of no firm evidence of this, and they were careful not to be drawn on it last night.

Although the CIS stadium is likely to be doomed under a quid-pro-quo arrangement between WDC and Brabco, another point that wasn't aired last night was that the walkway from the quay to the Rock CAN in fact be realised without encroaching on the football ground; indeed we must assume that unless said walkway isn't going to feature its own dip that this issue would need addressed anyway, so why not seek the win-win for both parties ?

I'll tell you why, because nether party has a shred of interest in seeing the CIS survive.  We must therefore prepare to gird our loins for the Renton Road battle.

Absolutely this.

A well maintained CID stadium & surroundings could be incorporated into the WDC plans.

If we had a Council with a shred of civic pride they'd pay BraBco to go away & utilise the CID for the whole community.

*I'm dreaming, I know*

[Dunning1874]

From an outsider's perspective it seems open and shut: if you currently own your stadium and have no urgent financial need to sell it, under no circumstances should you move to a stadium which you won't own. Even if there were no potential problems with the proposed new site that'd be too much of a risk to take; as there are evidently concerns about the viability of Young's Farm as well, it makes it a total no-go.

While your current stadium has issues which will be costly to resolve, taking the hit on those costs even if it impacts you on the pitch has to be preferable to jeopardising the long-term security of your club by moving. No ownership, no move has to be an absolute red line issue.

[Boghead ranter]

11 minutes ago, Dunning1874 said:

From an outsider's perspective it seems open and shut: if you currently own your stadium and have no urgent financial need to sell it, under no circumstances should you move to a stadium which you won't own. Even if there were no potential problems with the proposed new site that'd be too much of a risk to take; as there are evidently concerns about the viability of Young's Farm as well, it makes it a total no-go.

While your current stadium has issues which will be costly to resolve, taking the hit on those costs even if it impacts you on the pitch has to be preferable to jeopardising the long-term security of your club by moving. No ownership, no move has to be an absolute red line issue.

I'll even up the red dot that Benito Robles seemed to think that was worth.

[Nowhereman]

3 hours ago, The Moonster said:

It just doesn't add up for me. They said they'll take the profit from the sale of the current site, they'll own all of the new stadium and facitilities but the club will run it and take any profit loss from those facilities? Why, if you were Brabco, do you want to hold ownership of that if you won't make any money from it "until you die"? Simple, because they know they could potentially charge us rent in the future should they need to. That or him telling us the club will see the profit is a lie.

I've heard all I need to from Wilson and if I'm honest he's not the sort of guy I want on the DFC board. Morality seems to be a big problem for him and I feel extremely uneasy about him leading this project.

Or even worse if there are houses built round about the stadium they could decide to build more on the stadium site.

[The Moonster]

1 minute ago, Nowhereman said:

Or even worse if there are houses built round about the stadium they could decide to build more on the stadium site.

I'm fairly certain they need the stadium and sports facilities to have any hope of gaining planning permission, I think it was mentioned in the past that purely residential building on the Young's Farm site would not be approved.  Of course, it wasn't really confirmed last night what sort of stadium we would end up with - they were questioned on whether the full 4,000 capacity would be built or if it would be phased in depending on the value they get for the land and Wilson danced around the question.

[Nowhereman]

1 minute ago, The Moonster said:

I'm fairly certain they need the stadium and sports facilities to have any hope of gaining planning permission, I think it was mentioned in the past that purely residential building on the Young's Farm site would not be approved.  Of course, it wasn't really confirmed last night what sort of stadium we would end up with - they were questioned on whether the full 4,000 capacity would be built or if it would be phased in depending on the value they get for the land and Wilson danced around the question.

What I meant was that if Brabco retain ownership of the land and there are houses built round about the stadium then a few years down the line it might be financially viable for them to sell the site to housebuilders. And as the general use of the area will have changed who knows what planning permission might be granted.

[The Moonster]

Just now, Nowhereman said:

What I meant was that if Brabco retain ownership of the land and there are houses built round about the stadium then a few years down the line it might be financially viable for them to sell the site to housebuilders. And as the general use of the area will have changed who knows what planning permission might be granted.

Fair point, yes. Wilson's "trust me that won't happen" guarantee just won't cut it on that front.

[Bankies Alive]

16 minutes ago, The Moonster said:

Fair point, yes. Wilson's "trust me that won't happen" guarantee just won't cut it on that front.

Thats the scenario id be most worried about!

They could pull the same trick that happened to us and say the big bad council wouldnt let them build what they wanted so they`ve been forced into selling the stadium site for housing to keep the club alive.You`ll be left with a groundshare agreement at Cappielow and they`ll be off over the horizon with their pockets full.

[pleslie99]

Why would we need 4000 seats anyway? Surely around 1000 seats and the rest terraced would suffice for a club like ours?
Also I worry about any potential groundshare as bankies alive mentioned? What are the plans regarding this? I sure as hell don't want to groundshare with Morton/st Mirren or anyone else

[The Moonster]

4 minutes ago, pleslie99 said:

Why would we need 4000 seats anyway? Surely around 1000 seats and the rest terraced would suffice for a club like ours?
Also I worry about any potential groundshare as bankies alive mentioned? What are the plans regarding this? I sure as hell don't want to groundshare with Morton/st Mirren or anyone else

We don't need a 4,000 capacity, but the justification for moving is that we need more space in order to let more away fans in when bigger teams visit us, which by 2018/19 might not be very often. Wilson said last night they don't want to ground share. Really though, all of that is irrelevant if we don't own our new ground, that is the most important thing out of all of this.

[pleslie99]

We don't need a 4,000 capacity, but the justification for moving is that we need more space in order to let more away fans in when bigger teams visit us, which by 2018/19 might not be very often. Wilson said last night they don't want to ground share. Really though, all of that is irrelevant if we don't own our new ground, that is the most important thing out of all of this.

I agree, however I feel that we may get pushed before we jump in this instance and the move has already been agreed before us fans even get our gripes in! Hopefully I'm wrong

[Nowhereman]

4 hours ago, O'Kelly Isley III said:

It's certainly looking that way and the post-truth mantra about 'bad neighbours' is part of the same agenda; other than verbal claims by the Brabco people, I know of no firm evidence of this, and they were careful not to be drawn on it last night.

Although the CIS stadium is likely to be doomed under a quid-pro-quo arrangement between WDC and Brabco, another point that wasn't aired last night was that the walkway from the quay to the Rock CAN in fact be realised without encroaching on the football ground; indeed we must assume that unless said walkway isn't going to feature its own dip that this issue would need addressed anyway, so why not seek the win-win for both parties ?

I'll tell you why, because nether party has a shred of interest in seeing the CIS survive.  We must therefore prepare to gird our loins for the Renton Road battle.

Like you I have never felt that the local council have taken much of an interest in the affairs of DFC. Indeed they have often seemed to be a stumbling block. If the Council are happy to ease Brabco's way it makes their current investment in Clydebank's stadium all the more galling. For the amount that they are spending on that they could just about buy out Brabco's interest in DFC and then run the Rock as a community stadium.

[sonsanorak]

The main justification given for us moving was that the club could gain additional revenue streams from renting out footbaĺl pitches, office space and function spaces separated from the matchday functions. This would then give the club additional income to fund full time football/better players. The bigger capacity is not something brabco expect to contribute more than an extra 1500 fans / £30,000 per season.

Sounds fine except brabco would own the ground (and perhaps the football pitches) and 2 of the 3 pitches would be on the flood plain. The income streams would be so variable as to make budgetting difficult.

Plenty to be concerned about and we should all be joining the Sonstrust and using them to represent the feelings and fears of the full support.

.

[parsforlife]

4. We don't have great facitilities for disabled people? That simply isn't true. There is a ramp at the season ticket entrance and after that the ENTIRE stadium is at ground floor level. Disabled fans can access via the ramp and sit in the front row, akin to every other footballing venue in the country. Perhaps a bigger cubicle would be handy but other than that I fail to see one single issue.

The 'dumped in the front row' is a fairly common complaint from our disabled fans, they much prefer elevated platforms, a facility that as you point out is very rarely offered.

Some utterly terrible grounds for disabled fans across the country, and I doubt the current ground is one of those, but that doesn't mean you have created an environment that offers equality for all.

[parsforlife]

Oh and babco sound like wanks. Really failing to see how this can be a good deal for Dumbarton.