Jump to content

The Aberdeen Mega-Hyper New Stadium Thread


Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, ForzaDundee said:

Here is Aberdeen's past and future average attendance (largest attendance in brackets). I have been to the future and have gathered this data which shows the success of Kingsford with many games selling out and Kingsford being extended for season 30-31. Aberdeen have formed an intense rivalry with Dundee City whose New Camperdown Park Stadium ( the Nou Campy) stadium is also due for an extension to 30,000.  Hibs are embarking upon a project to turn Easter Road into a 30,000 indoor dome arena for concerts. Whilst Hearts fans are livid at Anne Budge for tieing the club to Tynecastle where future growth is limited and are calling for a move to Murrayfield but Edinburgh City already have a deal with the SRU to use their Edinburgh Rugby stadium at Murrayfield outer pitches (Minifield) and already move to the main Murrayfield for big games since they gained promotion to the top division in 2026.

09-10 - 10,461 (16,803)
10-11 - 9,072 (15,307)
11-12 - 9,297 (15,468)
12-13 - 9,611 (18,000)
13-14 - 12,027 (20,106)
14-15 - 13,359 (19,051)
15-16 - 13,094 (20,385)
16-17 - 12,453 (19,332)
17-18 - 15,775 (20,528)
18-19 - 15,500 (20,027)
19-20 - 15,500 (20,000)
20-21 - 17,000 (20,200)
21-22 - 19,000 (20,000) If full season at Kingsford
22-23 - 19,000 (20,000)
...
28-29 - 19,000 (20,000)
30-31 - 24,000 (30,000) Kingsford extended to appro 30,000 Seats

Too much time on your hands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, topcat(The most tip top) said:

 

Hearts had too many season ticket holders to realistically fit into the remaining three stands. In previous seasons they just bit the bullet and reduced the capacity

 

More recently the last derby of 2019-10 was watched by less than 12,000 as Hibs had already demolished the Old East stand

 

For Aberdeen it’s only when the south stand is out of commission that you’ve got a serious issue and even then you’ve probably got enough seats for fixtures against smaller clubs

 

 

 

AFAIK the capacities of the 3  non RDS 'stands' are, very roughly, South 8,000 Main 4,000 and Merkland 3,000 and the RDS is about 6,000

Therefore, while the RDS was being built the capacity must have been about 15,000 (8k + 4k + 3K)

Once the RDS was up, they should have rebuilt the South Stand - the capacity while that was going on would have been about 13,000 (6K + 3K + 4K). If we got by on 15,000 while the RDS was going up we could have survived for a season on 13,000. FYI the season the RDS opened, other than the OF games,  AFC had 2 games out of 18 Home games over 13,000 (44 game 12 team league) - side note AFC finished 2nd this season but the average attendance was 12,500, 10 games att. was under 10,000. Hearts averaged 11,000 and Hibs 9,700 - I really didn't remember attendances were so poor back then )

Thereafter, with the 8,000 South Stand and 6,000 RDS in place the capacity would never have below 17,000, plenty big enough en route to a 20,000 seat Pittodrie.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Jacksgranda said:

I occasionally walked from thr Bridge of Dee to Pittodrie.

I knew a guy that walked from Macintosh Donald in Portlethen to go to the pub at the harbour in town every day.  He was a complete jaikie though. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, ForzaDundee said:

Here is Aberdeen's past and future average attendance (largest attendance in brackets). I have been to the future and have gathered this data which shows the success of Kingsford with many games selling out and Kingsford being extended for season 30-31. Aberdeen have formed an intense rivalry with Dundee City whose New Camperdown Park Stadium ( the Nou Campy) stadium is also due for an extension to 30,000.  Hibs are embarking upon a project to turn Easter Road into a 30,000 indoor dome arena for concerts. Whilst Hearts fans are livid at Anne Budge (RIP) for tieing the club to Tynecastle where future growth is limited and are calling for a move to Murrayfield but Edinburgh City already have a deal with the SRU to use their Edinburgh Rugby stadium at Murrayfield outer pitches (Minifield) and already move to the main Murrayfield for big games since they gained promotion to the top division in 2026.

09-10 - 10,461 (16,803)
10-11 - 9,072 (15,307)
11-12 - 9,297 (15,468)
12-13 - 9,611 (18,000)
13-14 - 12,027 (20,106)
14-15 - 13,359 (19,051)
15-16 - 13,094 (20,385)
16-17 - 12,453 (19,332)
17-18 - 15,775 (20,528)
18-19 - 15,500 (20,027)
19-20 - 15,500 (20,000)
20-21 - 17,000 (20,200)
21-22 - 19,000 (20,000) If full season at Kingsford
22-23 - 19,000 (20,000)
...
28-29 - 19,000 (20,000)
30-31 - 24,000 (30,000) Kingsford extended to appro 30,000 Seats

Good gried

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, EdTheDuck said:

AFAIK the capacities of the 3  non RDS 'stands' are, very roughly, South 8,000 Main 4,000 and Merkland 3,000 and the RDS is about 6,000

Therefore, while the RDS was being built the capacity must have been about 15,000 (8k + 4k + 3K)

Once the RDS was up, they should have rebuilt the South Stand - the capacity while that was going on would have been about 13,000 (6K + 3K + 4K). If we got by on 15,000 while the RDS was going up we could have survived for a season on 13,000. FYI the season the RDS opened, other than the OF games,  AFC had 2 games out of 18 Home games over 13,000 (44 game 12 team league) - side note AFC finished 2nd this season but the average attendance was 12,500, 10 games att. was under 10,000. Hearts averaged 11,000 and Hibs 9,700 - I really didn't remember attendances were so poor back then )

Thereafter, with the 8,000 South Stand and 6,000 RDS in place the capacity would never have below 17,000, plenty big enough en route to a 20,000 seat Pittodrie.

 

Fair enough we spent money on a heap of shite but what would we have been using to buy players etc if all the funds were going in to stand renovation?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Merkland Red said:

There isn't 4500 who walk to Pittodrie. I'm happy for you to go with the percentage you pulled from the survey for the sake of an argument but that survey was available to all Dons fans, not just season ticket holders or folk who have purchased tickets through the club.

Is there any reason to believe that ST holders will be more likely to drive to the ground than non-ST holders? I'd expect, if there is any kind of correlation, it's the opposite - fans who live nearer the ground will be more confident of making it to most of the matches (thereby getting their money's worth from an ST), and be more likely to walk to the stadium. If Dons fans in Dundee or Glasgow are answering this survey, they're less likely to be ST holders, and they're much more likely to be in among the 70% of respondents who use motor transport than the 6% or so who get to the ground via 'other' methods (presumably that's mostly those who arrive via train). What you're suggesting is that the 28% is an underestimate.

Edited by Aim Here
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Merkland Red said:

Fair enough we spent money on a heap of shite but what would we have been using to buy players etc if all the funds were going in to stand renovation?

Well, that was kinda my point in an earlier post. In the 10 years after the RDS was opened AFC ran up operating losses of over £15,000,000 and were absolute garbage. How much worse would it have been if AFC hadn't signed all that crap at premium rates and just stuck to their guns, working away at break even? How much worse COULD it have been?

At the time the RDS had cost £5Million. Suppose the South Stand cost £10M. Spread it over 5 years, the stand itself with its bars and lounges should have made a contribution to its own cost. Ditto a 5 year plan for the Mainer and something similar for the Merkland. That would take us to 2008, whole place rebuilt. Even if the debt wasn't paid off it couldn't have been any worse than the desperate mess the club was in in 2008. The debt was around £12M and the club had a stadium that was contributing to that debt rather than help pay off debt or contribute to club funds.

If you see what I mean...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Aim Here said:

Is there any reason to believe that ST holders will be more likely to drive to the ground than non-ST holders? I'd expect, if there is any kind of correlation, it's the opposite - fans who live nearer the ground will be more confident of making it to most of the matches (thereby getting their money's worth from an ST), and be more likely to walk to the stadium. If Dons fans in Dundee or Glasgow are answering this survey, they're less likely to be ST holders, and they're much more likely to be in among the 70% of respondents who use motor transport than the 6% or so who get to the ground via 'other' methods (presumably that's mostly those who arrive via train). What you're suggesting is that the 28% is an underestimate.

No. People are creatures of habit. What I'm suggesting is that folk who really want to go will go whether they are within walking distance or not.

4 minutes ago, EdTheDuck said:

Well, that was kinda my point in an earlier post. In the 10 years after the RDS was opened AFC ran up operating losses of over £15,000,000 and were absolute garbage. How much worse would it have been if AFC hadn't signed all that crap at premium rates and just stuck to their guns, working away at break even? How much worse COULD it have been?

At the time the RDS had cost £5Million. Suppose the South Stand cost £10M. Spread it over 5 years, the stand itself with its bars and lounges should have made a contribution to its own cost. Ditto a 5 year plan for the Mainer and something similar for the Merkland. That would take us to 2008, whole place rebuilt. Even if the debt wasn't paid off it couldn't have been any worse than the desperate mess the club was in in 2008. The debt was around £12M and the club had a stadium that was contributing to that debt rather than help pay off debt or contribute to club funds.

If you see what I mean...

 

Well if we didn't sign Eoin Jess I'd dread to think where we would have ended up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it speaks volumes that the majority of folk upvoting posts stating the location of the stadium should be in the City Centre are from fans of other clubs with no real grasp of the current location etc.
If you're to look at a map of Aberdeen, it's hardly in an ideal location as it is.
Pittodrie is about a 20 minute walk from Union Street. Half an hour from the station. Pretty sure the new stadium is further away than that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Merkland Red said:

No. People are creatures of habit. What I'm suggesting is that folk who really want to go will go whether they are within walking distance or not.

'Folk who really want to go' is nowhere near everybody, contrary to the obsessive football fan stereotype. Aberdeen's average gate is 6k up on what it was 6 years ago. That suggests that over 1/3 of Dons fans aren't the ones who 'really want to go' to the football week-in week-out but are much more conditional in their support. No doubt that particular variation is largely down to results, but it might well be that travel hassle or time might be a factor in how a significant portion of matchgoers choose to spend their Saturday afternoons. AFC are about to run the experiment to find out.

And when you say 'People are creatures of habit', note that you're the one arguing in favour of folk changing their lifetime matchday habits. If the folk who currently sink a couple of pints in the city centre before wandering down to Pittodrie find they don't like the pubs near the new stadium - or the hotel bars near the stadium don't like THEM, or they find it too cumbersome to take the bus to Kingsford (if the bus takes too long, due to the heavy matchday traffic, say), they might be forced to choose between their 'drink in their favourite city centre pub' habit and their 'go to the match' habit. For many fans, going to the match is far from an unconditional priority.

Edited by Aim Here
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Aim Here said:

'Folk who really want to go' is nowhere near everybody, contrary to the obsessive football fan stereotype. Aberdeen's average gate is 6k up on what it was 6 years ago. That suggests that over 1/3 of Dons fans aren't the ones who 'really want to go' to the football week-in week-out but are much more conditional in their support. No doubt that particular variation is largely down to results, but it might well be that travel hassle or time might be a factor in how a significant portion of matchgoers choose to spend their Saturday afternoons.

And when you say 'People are creatures of habit', note that you're the one arguing in favour of folk changing their lifetime matchday habits. If the folk who currently sink a couple of pints in the city centre before wandering down to Pittodrie find they don't like the pubs near the new stadium, or find it too cumbersome to take the bus to Kingsford (if the bus takes too long, due to the heavy matchday traffic, say), they might be forced to choose between their 'drink in their favourite city centre pub' habit and ditch their 'go to the match' habit. For many folks, going to the match is far from an unconditional priority.

I think you'll find most folk who drank pints then decided to go to Pittodrie on a whim decided to stop doing this when rules came in to force that now means you have to go to the ticket office and can no longer PATG.

I'm not discussing match day habits. I'm discussing the choice of going to a game as a habit.

The average attendance is up around 6K yes, but season ticket sales have not raised too significantly. You could also take in to account that a portion of that 6K will have been fans who couldn't have attended for whatever reason before (age etc).

It's pure guesswork on both sides. I'm looking at the facts that the club will be doing all they can to make transport a non factor/small a factor as possible. If someone decides they'd rather not go to the football because they now have a 15 minute bus journey (rather than 10-15 minute walk to Pittodrie) to encounter after their pints then I'd guess they aren't too fussed about going at all.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Lebowski said:
5 hours ago, Merkland Red said:
I think it speaks volumes that the majority of folk upvoting posts stating the location of the stadium should be in the City Centre are from fans of other clubs with no real grasp of the current location etc.
If you're to look at a map of Aberdeen, it's hardly in an ideal location as it is.

Pittodrie is about a 20 minute walk from Union Street. Half an hour from the station. Pretty sure the new stadium is further away than that.

Pointless post. It may be an ideal location for folk who bus to Union street beforehand or live within walking distance but it's a nightmare for anyone traveling by car.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Merkland Red said:

I think you'll find most folk who drank pints then decided to go to Pittodrie on a whim decided to stop doing this when rules came in to force that now means you have to go to the ticket office and can no longer PATG.

I'm not discussing match day habits. I'm discussing the choice of going to a game as a habit.

I wasn't necessarily talking about that, I'm talking about the many folks who drink a couple of pints in the city centre then walk to the match right now. They exist. I've seen them! They're going to have to disrupt their habits one way or another. It's not a given that football will win.

13 minutes ago, Merkland Red said:

The average attendance is up around 6K yes, but season ticket sales have not raised too significantly. You could also take in to account that a portion of that 6K will have been fans who couldn't have attended for whatever reason before (age etc).

Doesn't matter whether the attendance is season ticket sales or not. That's 6k whose attendance isn't a given even at Pittodrie, let alone the new stadium.

And there's simply no demographic change going on in Aberdeen that's rapid enough to explain that 2/3 increase in matchgoers over 6-8 years (was there a Y2K baby boom? Did they discover the secret of eternal life in Aberdeenshire?) The most rapid demographic changes are likely to be due to East European migration and new-built student housing, and you're of the opinion those are the people in Aberdeen who are NOT going to the matches!

Edited by Aim Here
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...