Was that Hampden's last hurrah?

[eez-eh]

1 minute ago, Miguel Sanchez said:

Sounds like a good business plan that. Open a pub near Hampden. Gap in the market, obviously. 

Only worthwhile if it’s a Michelin star bar/restaurant IMO.

[RadgerTheBadger]

4 hours ago, Michael W said:

In terms of rail, getting back from Hampden to Fife and other places following a midweek international isn't easy either. Get out sharp or you've had it, basically. I used to drive to Linlithgow for the train to make sure I got back.

Why didn’t you just drive all the way there and back?

3 hours ago, Grant228 said:

Aye, but if you wanted to walk an hour you could have gotten to Waverley in plenty time. 

You could walk from Murrayfield and be on Leith Walk within an hour

3 hours ago, HibeeJibee said:

However I doubt there'll be redevelopment of the stadium itself, as this seems to make clear:

The actual price of this is somewhere in the region of £19.5million. There will be no redevelopments as they haven’t got a pot to piss in

As for them going to improve transport links, well it’s 20 years too late. Whatever they say about transport improvements is nothing more than white noise. 

3 hours ago, flyingscot said:

I'm not from Glasgow and to get back to Paisley

So, your from Glasgow then

1 hour ago, flyingscot said:

I go to the rugby a lot and you'll see people moaning about gigs and 6 Nations games at Murrayfield having similar issues getting home.  

Murrayfield have so to be fair tried to manage the issue around bars by having large bars and big screens in the stadia area to keep people there. Doesn't always work if it's peeing down in November mind! 

When there’s events on at Murrayfield they pay extra for policing the traffic. They clear the road all the way along Corstorphine to the Maybury so you’ve got a double lane meaning traffic clears on almost double time

Anything that the SFA have came out with during this whole charade has been nothing more than propaganda 

Edited September 11, 2018 by RadgerTheBadger

[itzdrk]

34 minutes ago, Marshmallo said:

Genuine tears of laughter at someone saying there are no pubs within a mile and a half of Hampden. 

This, the southside is fantastic for pubs, it's heaving with them. 

[RadgerTheBadger]

15 minutes ago, Arch Stanton said:

I can think of 6 within a 10 minute walk...Church on the Hill, Armstrongs, Florida Park, Clockwork, Beechwood, Montford, International...actually, that's 7.

Only 6 which you have to que up to get into

Murrayfield will probably have close to 100 pubs and restaurants within 20 minute walk. You only have to drive along roseburn and you’ll see countless hotels with bar facilities right on the doorstep. 20 minutes from Shandwick Place and just a few minutes further along you have Rose Street and The Grassmarket

Edited September 11, 2018 by RadgerTheBadger

[drs]

5 minutes ago, RadgerTheBadger said:

Why didn’t you just drive all the way there and back?

You could walk from Murrayfield and be on Leith Walk within an hour

The actual probe is somewhere in the region of £19.5million. There will be no redevelopments as they haven’t got a pot to piss in

As for them going to improve transport links, well it’s 20 years too late. Whatever they say about transport improvements is nothing more than white noise. 

So, your from Glasgow then

When there’s events on at Murrayfield they pay extra for policing the traffic. They clear the road all the way along Corstorphine to the Maybury so you’ve got a double lane meaning traffic clears on almost double time

Anything that the SFA have came out with during this whole charade has been nothing more than propaganda 

Utterly seething that football is staying in the West.

Glasgow will always top Edinburgh.

[RadgerTheBadger]

37 minutes ago, drs said:

Utterly seething that football is staying in the West.

Glasgow will always top Edinburgh.

Not seething, just stating facts. IF you’d  actually paid attention and read the thread properly you’ll see I’m delighted we are staying at Hampden as I stated when it was first announced earlier.

To say Murrayfield has worse transport links than Hampden is utterly preposterous though

We’re from the capital, you’re from a shithole

Edited September 11, 2018 by RadgerTheBadger

[mozam76]

Are folk genuinely still of the misguided belief (hope?) that upwards of £60m is going to be spent bringing the sides in, lowering the pitch etc., when the SFA had to get the begging bowl out to a "philanthropist" for £2.5m? 

Without sounding all Bomber-esque, what does Haughey get here? A warm fuzzy feeling of doing good? Aye fucking right.

The whole thing stinks. It did a month ago, it did yesterday, and it still does today.

[HibeeJibee]

42 minutes ago, RadgerTheBadger said:

The actual price of this is somewhere in the region of £19.5million. There will be no redevelopments as they haven’t got a pot to piss in

FWIW this figure of £19M+ seems to include paper liabilities for repaying debentures and Millennium Fund grants etc. if the stadium ever stops being used for football? These were the stone around Queen's Park neck if SFA walked away to Murrayfield and they were unable to keep the stadium going themselves.

Clearly the SFA haven't bought the stadium to turn it into a donkey sanctuary, drive through restaurant or astronomic observatory... so surely these aren't really onerous liabilities?

They have paid £2.5M and had it matched by some businessmen and assumed some other liabilities which they won't ever have to meet (unless they decide to sell off the stadium some day: in which case they'd presumably be looking at deals for houses to wash its face). If QP have managed to obtain sell-on clauses even the housing idea mightn't fly, either.


Certainly I can't see any substantial money being spent "bringing the stands closer to the pitch" or whatever. Government alone would have such sums and clearly have better priorities for it. Even within football such money would be better spent on grassroots facilities.

Edited September 11, 2018 by HibeeJibee

[EH75]

Only way any serious redevelopment is going to happen is if we start to qualify for tournaments semi regularly and the associated cash injection that would bring. So basically, it's not happening. 

[Sergeant Wilson]

25 minutes ago, mozam76 said:

Are folk genuinely still of the misguided belief (hope?) that upwards of £60m is going to be spent bringing the sides in, lowering the pitch etc., when the SFA had to get the begging bowl out to a "philanthropist" for £2.5m? 

Without sounding all Bomber-esque, what does Haughey get here? A warm fuzzy feeling of doing good? Aye fucking right.

The whole thing stinks. It did a month ago, it did yesterday, and it still does today.

They could make the pitch bigger. That would make it closer to the stands.

As Sparky said earlier, once some feasibility charades are gone through, they'll flog it.

[craigkillie]

59 minutes ago, DA Baracus said:

How are folk thinking the redevelopments they want can happen?

Firstly, what gives you the impression the SFA would do it? To them there isn't really a problem as they still get thousands of mug fans paying for overpriced membership fees, tickets and replica strips. They've continually proven that they have no idea what fans want and don't care what fans want.

Secondly, assuming they somehow were going to redevelop it, where would they get the cash from? Who would invest?

They struggled to sell memberships for this campaign, and the attendance last night for the first competitive match was about 17,000 despite the prices being OK. That will clearly be setting off some alarm bells with them.

In terms of the funding, they obviously don't have the cash reserves to pay for it, but few organisations or football clubs do. I would assume that mortgages (or similar arrangements) exist for large scale building projects like these so that they could spread the payment over a longer period. The SFA's turnover last year was just under £40m, so it's not as though they have absolutely no money to play with.

[GAD]

54 minutes ago, itzdrk said:

This, the southside is fantastic for pubs, it's heaving with them. 

At least if the bumpkins are all queuing up outside the clockwork the decent pubs are less busy.

[Diamonds are Forever]

Surely their medium/long term aim is just to sell it? If they can barely put £2.5 million together to pay for it, where's the money for the refurbishments that parts of the stadium need over the next few years, never mind any talk of major redevelopments.

The money being put in by Haughey and Hunter is interesting too, fail to see what they are gaining and you don't get to that level of wealth by just handing out over a million pounds for some wishy washy 'we need a home of football' type reason.

Edited September 11, 2018 by Diamonds are Forever

[The Spider]

I'm still in a state of shock.

It's been several hours since the initial agreement was announced which secures the future of both Queen's Park and Hampden, and still no-one from the Tories has come-in yet with a counter-proposal to scupper it.  What the f*ck's golng on here -  is there really nothing that you can rely on anymore?

[lanky_ffc]

1 hour ago, DA Baracus said:

How are folk thinking the redevelopments they want can happen?

Firstly, what gives you the impression the SFA would do it? To them there isn't really a problem as they still get thousands of mug fans paying for overpriced membership fees, tickets and replica strips. They've continually proven that they have no idea what fans want and don't care what fans want.

Secondly, assuming they somehow were going to redevelop it, where would they get the cash from? Who would invest?

If there was a will to redevelop it, surely we could look at naming rights to fund part/all of it. Ireland got about €40m for 10 years from Aviva. 

Sadly it's hard to disagree with the rest of your post. 

[Arch Stanton]

20 minutes ago, The Spider said:

I'm still in a state of shock.

It's been several hours since the initial agreement was announced which secures the future of both Queen's Park and Hampden, and still no-one from the Tories  Rangers boardroom has come-in yet with a counter-proposal to scupper it.  What the f*ck's golng on here -  is there really nothing that you can rely on anymore?

FTFY

[Diamonds are Forever]

28 minutes ago, lanky_ffc said:

If there was a will to redevelop it, surely we could look at naming rights to fund part/all of it. Ireland got about €40m for 10 years from Aviva. 

Sadly it's hard to disagree with the rest of your post. 

 

I wonder how much a new name would stick though, and whether that would make it less interesting to investors. The Aviva was a complete rebuild and although it's on the Lansdowne Road site I'd never think of it as a 'new' Lansdowne Road, it's just known by everyone as the Aviva. That's a sponsor's dream. If Arsenal had modified Highbury and been sponsored by Emirates everyone would still refer to it as Highbury, but with the newbuild the new name sticks.

If Hampden just had the ends re-done, even if it changed it's name to the sponsor's name, I don't think it would stick at all. I can't see anyone willing to seriously invest in that.

Edited September 11, 2018 by Diamonds are Forever

[velo army]

I could see A big company putting up money for naming rights. Irn Bru would be my preferred option having an association with the fan base, but the orange and blue seats might be a bit hard to stomach for some.....

[Diamonds are Forever]

7 minutes ago, velo army said:

I could see A big company putting up money for naming rights. Irn Bru would be my preferred option having an association with the fan base, but the orange and blue seats might be a bit hard to stomach for some.....

 

Might be on to something, given the number of empty seats at matches colour associated seats would be a better advertisement than any naming rights...

[HibeeJibee]

10 minutes ago, Diamonds are Forever said:

I wonder how much a new name would stick though, and whether that would make it less interesting to investors. The Aviva was a complete rebuild and although it's on the Lansdowne Road site I'd never think of it as a 'new' Lansdowne Road, it's just known by everyone as the Aviva. That's a sponsor's dream. If Arsenal had modified Highbury and been sponsored by Emirates everyone would still refer to it as Highbury, but with the newbuild the new name sticks.

If Hampden just had the ends re-done, even if it changed it's name to the sponsor's name, I don't think it would stick at all. I can't see anyone willing to seriously invest in that.

In a similar vein does anyone outside of formal media refer to "BT" Murrayfield?

Also we'd surely be talking vast sums the way construction costs nowadays. Hearts spent £15M building a new 6,000-seat main stand. While that includes office hospitality and associated facilities the stand itself is 'vanilla' - just like the other 3 - and Hampden's ends must be 4 times larger under an incorporated roof.

Edited September 11, 2018 by HibeeJibee