All things Dundee FC

[locheedee]

1 minute ago, Tibbermoresaint said:

I very much doubt someone called Aufc supports the Saints. You really are as thick as shit.

Some of us are working, so my apologies to Aufc for the slur in calling him one of yours but I didnt bother reading his shite that closely

[Tibbermoresaint]

1 minute ago, locheedee said:

Some of us are working, so my apologies to Aufc for the slur in calling him one of yours but I didnt bother reading his shite that closely

Thicker than shit evidently.

[tree house tam]

12 minutes ago, locheedee said:

simple 

Very good description. 

[Kyle]

3 minutes ago, locheedee said:

Who rattled your cage fannybaws?

Did I say anything about how well each team had made use of their resources?

+

Since you're on the Dundee thread here more than your own teams, you should know we've not been best pleased at how Hartley and others have made an arse of things.

&

If you'd maybe read more of your own fans comments, only a few weeks back they were greetin yet again about Brown giving Wright f**k all money to spend so jog on cunto

Brown has managed to get Wright's top 2 targets with 1 more high profile to hopefully come. Brown's had a great summer and he's certainly not been stingy with money or we wouldn't have gotten O'Halloran and Scougall.

 

Just now, Granny Danger said:

As I have already posted, according to press reports the land aquisition has been £1.2million.  I'm guessing, and I will admit it's just a guess, that the whole shebang is going to cost £12 - £15 million (based on the figures being bandied about for Aberdeen's new stadium this is maybe a conservative estimate).  Not sure how you get an income to cover these costs from renting the stadium out to Dundee FC and any functions, etc., let alone any return on investment.  If there was a market for this I'm sure lots of other clubs would be upgrading to new stadia.

It all depends on the figures involved with the tenancy, how much they project Dundee's own turnover/profit will increase as a  result of the move. A £15 million investment for an extra couple of million a year turnover for Dundee (which isn't that unrealistic seeing as they currently run with around £1 million a year less than Saints do and they don't have the off field money makers right now) on top of however much the rent costs, it wont take that long for a return on the investment, especially if it's a long term tenancy agreement.

Aren't the Americans multi-millionaires also? The initial outlay might not be that much to them.

[PauloPerth]

37 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

I think it's even more fundamental than that.  When St Johnstone built McDermid they got a huge sum from ASDA and they got the land either free or for a nominal amount; that made the whole think financially viable.  Dundee won't get anything for Dens, because they don't own it, and the land aquisition costs are £1.2million according to press reports.

I can't see a few functions making a hell of a lot of difference TBH.

Does anyone know if Nelms has actually bought the site yet or does he just have an option to purchase?

 

This is not true.

The whole deal was based around no cash whatsoever, to avoid tax. Asda got the Muirton Park site and in return they paid for the building of the new stadium. The cost was about £5m.

The land was free. A local farmer, Bruce McDiarmid, gifted the club the new site for nothing.  An incredible coincidence that someone called McDiarmid gifted the land that McDiarmid Park was built on, but there you go.

When you look back at it, you realise how well Saints did out of the whole deal.

[lionel hutz]

5 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

As I have already posted, according to press reports the land aquisition has been £1.2million.  I'm guessing, and I will admit it's just a guess, that the whole shebang is going to cost £12 - £15 million (based on the figures being bandied about for Aberdeen's new stadium this is maybe a conservative estimate).  Not sure how you get an income to cover these costs from renting the stadium out to Dundee FC and any functions, etc., let alone any return on investment.  If there was a market for this I'm sure lots of other clubs would be upgrading to new stadia.

Any decent new stadia costs more than £25m.

If they built it for £15m then it would be effectively an ikea McDairmid-esque stadium.

[AfternoonDeeLight]

If St Johnstone were replacing the Perth Cremy Funeral Tea Arena or United were moving out to their spiritual home east of Dobbies I wouldn't be squatting on their threads. Just shows how box office Dundee remain to the satellite teams. [emoji41]

[Louis Litt]

Hemmings has joined Mansfield fucking Town on loan for the season. 

He probably had no interest in coming back to Scotland but come on to f**k.

[tree house tam]

Just now, AfternoonDeeLight said:

If St Johnstone were replacing the Perth Cremy Funeral Tea Arena or United were moving out to their spiritual home east of Dobbies I wouldn't be squatting on their threads. Just shows how box office Dundee remain to the satellite teams.

Everybody loves a bit of comedy right?

[AfternoonDeeLight]

Everybody loves a bit of comedy right?

Why do you think people entertain your posts here?

[tree house tam]

1 minute ago, Louis Litt said:

Hemmings has joined Mansfield fucking Town on loan for the season. 

He probably had no interest in coming back to Scotland but come on to f**k.

Tbf it's a big step up from Dundee. 

[tree house tam]

Just now, AfternoonDeeLight said:

 

Why do you think people entertain your posts here?

 

You just did you fanny

 

[RossDee01]

It all depends on the figures involved with the tenancy, how much they project Dundee's own turnover/profit will increase as a  result of the move. A £15 million investment for an extra couple of million a year turnover for Dundee (which isn't that unrealistic seeing as they currently run with around £1 million a year less than Saints do and they don't have the off field money makers right now) on top of however much the rent costs, it wont take that long for a return on the investment, especially if it's a long term tenancy agreement.
Aren't the Americans multi-millionaires also? The initial outlay might not be that much to them.

2 weeks ago your fan base was in meltdown because you didn't have a decent striker and Thistle signed Storey.

[Ludo*1]

16 minutes ago, Tibbermoresaint said:

I very much doubt someone called Aufc supports the Saints. You really are as thick as shit.

Well it's not as if he supports Airdrie United either tbf.

[PauloPerth]

17 minutes ago, SweeperDee said:

What's stopping Keyes/Nelms fucking off once we are tenants in the new stadium? Then we are stuck in the same situation as we are in now with Dens; probably more costly also. That's what worries me about the fact that we won't own the stadium, it leaves us open to that sort of shit happening.

That would be my concern. If they eventually lose interest in football, or sell up, or die and their successors have no link to the club and are only interested in making profit, where does that leave the club?

 I mentioned Coventry City the other day.. they had the same situation where they ended up playing 60 miles away because of a huge fall out with the new stadium owners.  I suppose Dundee wouldn't have to go as far, but it's hardly ideal.

 

[Granny Danger]

14 minutes ago, Kyle said:

Brown has managed to get Wright's top 2 targets with 1 more high profile to hopefully come. Brown's had a great summer and he's certainly not been stingy with money or we wouldn't have gotten O'Halloran and Scougall.

 

It all depends on the figures involved with the tenancy, how much they project Dundee's own turnover/profit will increase as a  result of the move. A £15 million investment for an extra couple of million a year turnover for Dundee (which isn't that unrealistic seeing as they currently run with around £1 million a year less than Saints do and they don't have the off field money makers right now) on top of however much the rent costs, it wont take that long for a return on the investment, especially if it's a long term tenancy agreement.

Aren't the Americans multi-millionaires also? The initial outlay might not be that much to them.

That makes it a completely different issue of course.  If it's all being done for altruistic reasons then the figures do not need to add up the same.

13 minutes ago, PauloPerth said:

This is not true.

The whole deal was based around no cash whatsoever, to avoid tax. Asda got the Muirton Park site and in return they paid for the building of the new stadium. The cost was about £5m.

The land was free. A local farmer, Bruce McDiarmid, gifted the club the new site for nothing.  An incredible coincidence that someone called McDiarmid gifted the land that McDiarmid Park was built on, but there you go.

When you look back at it, you realise how well Saints did out of the whole deal.

Same difference.  My point was that St Johnstone's outlay was vastly reduced by the deals that were done, however they were structured.  This is not the case with the Dundee proposal.

2 minutes ago, PauloPerth said:

That would be my concern. If they eventually lose interest in football, or sell up, or die and their successors have no link to the club and are only interested in making profit, where does that leave the club?

 I mentioned Coventry City the other day.. they had the same situation where they ended up playing 60 miles away because of a huge fall out with the new stadium owners.  I suppose Dundee wouldn't have to go as far, but it's hardly ideal.

 

I genuinly don't think that's an issue.  Once you build a football stadium there's not a hell of a lot you can do with it other than play football.  That is if you want to make an income from it.  Everythink else is ancillary.

Once it is built the oqners will not have a great deal of leverage IMO, they will be as dependent upon it being a success as the football club.

 

[Tibbermoresaint]

3 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

 

I genuinly don't think that's an issue.  Once you build a football stadium there's not a hell of a lot you can do with it other than play football. 

 

Well that's not true. You could demolish it and build a supermarket. Or a retail park. Or flats. Or anything.

[PauloPerth]

4 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

That makes it a completely different issue of course.  If it's all being done for altruistic reasons then the figures do not need to add up the same.

Same difference.  My point was that St Johnstone's outlay was vastly reduced by the deals that were done, however they were structured.  This is not the case with the Dundee proposal.

I genuinly don't think that's an issue.  Once you build a football stadium there's not a hell of a lot you can do with it other than play football.  That is if you want to make an income from it.  Everythink else is ancillary.

Once it is built the oqners will not have a great deal of leverage IMO, they will be as dependent upon it being a success as the football club.

 

Disagree. They will have loads of other revenue streams from the stadium I would expect, which is the reason for moving there from Dens.

They may possibly hire the stadium out for concerts as well.

Whilst the Owners of the club and the new stadium are the same folk, you'd expect all will be fine. Further down the line, if that changes, then who knows?

[Granny Danger]

31 minutes ago, Tibbermoresaint said:

Well that's not true. You could demolish it and build a supermarket. Or a retail park. Or flats. Or anything.

  Yeah, let's spend millions of pounds building a football stadium then demolish it and build something else.  Let's not even take in to consideration the planning consents!

I hope you never think of starting a business.

Edited for speeling!

26 minutes ago, PauloPerth said:

Disagree. They will have loads of other revenue streams from the stadium I would expect, which is the reason for moving there from Dens.

They may possibly hire the stadium out for concerts as well.

Whilst the Owners of the club and the new stadium are the same folk, you'd expect all will be fine. Further down the line, if that changes, then who knows?

Of course there are other revenue streams, the question is how many and how lucrative?  There is a finite amount of demand for concert venues, particularly in this part of the world.

My point is not about the variety of sources of income, rather whether all of these combined make a venture like this financially viable; I have my doubts.

Edited August 22, 2017 by Granny Danger

[harry94]

45 minutes ago, PauloPerth said:

That would be my concern. If they eventually lose interest in football, or sell up, or die and their successors have no link to the club and are only interested in making profit, where does that leave the club?

 I mentioned Coventry City the other day.. they had the same situation where they ended up playing 60 miles away because of a huge fall out with the new stadium owners.  I suppose Dundee wouldn't have to go as far, but it's hardly ideal.

 

The difference is though that Coventry had the rugby side sharing with them and they were regularly producing considerable income which meant that the holding company could be more stubborn and push a harder deal. There aren't really any other uses of a stadium that is so regular in this part of the world so if the owners of the facility do end up being driven for profit, they could lose a massive amount of money if they engineered a situation in which Dundee were lost. United getting involved and moving in at the same time could be an issue as that then does reduce the dependence on Dundee in the long term.

I doubt we'll see them but I'd really like to see what contracts will be signed between Dundee and the stadium holders. Ideally, if the Americans were allowing us to pay minimal rent for x years, I'd like the club to put money aside each year to buy shares of the holding company so after a certain amount of time, we co have a certain defence against the sort of issue you point out.