Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
Cairters_Corner

Stadium developments

Recommended Posts


I thought that was done ages ago. I'm sure I read it in one of Gordon Scott's releases and it was dismissed at least for the time being. 

The only way extending the stadium makes any business sense at all would be if there were going to be revenue raising facilities fitted out the void spaces. And safe standing is just stupid. Rail seats - used for safe standing - cost around £80 per seat, whereas a normal seat costs around £30. Would fans wanting to stand be happy to pay a premium to do so? And would they be prepared to pay a premium to stand in the corner? 

Quote

“Depending on the number of seats, currency exchange rates and a few other variables, the ball park figure is around £80 per seat. By comparison, a top-of-the-range conventional grandstand seat might cost around £60, while cheap and cheerful budget seats come in at around £30. So rail seats aren’t cheap. But what price do you put on safety?"

To be honest I'd put a price of £30 per seat on safety since bog standard seats have improved stadium safety beyond any doubt since the Taylor Report. Standing has never been safer than sitting. Paying £50 per seat extra to reduce the level of safety in a football stadium is plain stupid. 

Edited by StuD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love the vibe that the singing section bring to the stadium and hope that their numbers continue to grow. I also believe that a statement was made on both safe standing and filling in the corners.

These were for a later date if and when sufficient demand was there to support a business case. Temporary seating in the corners had also been costed and dismissed. 

I think this was covered in the board announcement covering the allocation of both North and South Stands to Celtic and Rangers Fans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, St.Ricky said:

I love the vibe that the singing section bring to the stadium and hope that their numbers continue to grow. I also believe that a statement was made on both safe standing and filling in the corners.

These were for a later date if and when sufficient demand was there to support a business case. Temporary seating in the corners had also been costed and dismissed. 

I think this was covered in the board announcement covering the allocation of both North and South Stands to Celtic and Rangers Fans.

The fact that stadium improvements were mentioned again today without being asked specifically about it, suggests its back on the table and been discussed again since the celtic/rangers fans issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, StuD said:

To be honest I'd put a price of £30 per seat on safety since bog standard seats have improved stadium safety beyond any doubt since the Taylor Report. Standing has never been safer than sitting. Paying £50 per seat extra to reduce the level of safety in a football stadium is plain stupid. 

well said sir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, LargsBud said:

The fact that stadium improvements were mentioned again today without being asked specifically about it, suggests its back on the table and been discussed again since the celtic/rangers fans issue.

Surely you haven't got that from the Tweet? The Tweet says exactly the same thing as the previous statement from Gordon Scott. They'd been to Celtic Park to see it, costed it, and it's something that might happen in the future. That doesn't suggest it's anywhere near the table - indeed the final sentence suggests Gordon Scott told Saints Active that if they can raise the money for it they can pay for it. 

 

Edited by StuD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
St Mirren chairman Gordon Scott is to back new manager Alan Stubbs in the transfer market.
St Mirren chairman Gordon Scott is to back new manager Alan Stubbs in the transfer market. SNS

St Mirren chairman Gordon Scott said he will give new manager Alan Stubbs the green light to bring in at least seven signings this summer.

Stubbs was unveiled as Jack Ross' replacement on Monday after the former Hibs boss penned a three-year deal with the Buddies.

St Mirren's planned recruitment drive as they prepare for their top-flight return was put on hold when Ross departed to take charge of Sunderland.

 

While only Partick Thistle defender Paul McGinn and Aldershot midfielder Jim Kellerman have arrived through the door so far, a host of players have departed after their contracts expired.

Scott, however, said the club will now press on with signings under Stubbs' watch in a bid to get the Buddies up to speed ahead of their Premiership campaign.

He said: "He'll know himself what he wants to bring in, we've got a core of key players at the club, but even before Jack left we knew we'd have to bring in some players.

"Alan will get the funds to do that, to a degree.

"I'd expect six or seven players to come in at a minimum, possibly more depending on how he assesses the squad."

Former Celtic defender Stubbs has signed on for the next three seasons with the Paisley side after enduring a lengthy spell out of coaching since his sacking from Rotherham in 2016.

Scott insisted the length of contract reflected the longer-term planning taking place at the club.

He said: "You have to give somebody a chance to build something, we were building before and want to do so again.

"We want to develop the stadium and increase our turnover so we can compete in the top six.

"But that's not going to happen overnight so we've a long-term ambition not a short-term one."

He added: "We've always said that top six is a long-term target.

"But the target for Alan, football is about entertainment so if we stay in the league and we entertain the fans, that's all I want to achieve this year."

St Mirren received applications from high-profile candidates including Guti and Patrick Kluivert before opting for Stubbs.

Scott said the 46-year-old ticked every box on their wish list of attributes.

He continued: "We looked at a lot of people, obviously, and took a lot of references as to what is successful to be a manager in Scotland and he ticks every box.

"It was important that somebody has a realistic knowledge of the football club, in terms of the wages we can pay, in terms of the budget.

"Alan knew exactly what he was coming into, there were no doubts at all."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've love to see safe standing introduced into a section of the stadium. The clue is in the word "safe", this is a tried and tested solution that bears absolutely no resemblance to traditional terracing.

That said, it's difficult to see how it could be implemented in our current stadium unless it was in a dedicated corner like they have at Celtic Park.

If they put Safe Standing into W7 for example then the folk at the back of W6 wouldn't be able to see to their left because every fecker in W7 would be stood up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, div said:

I've love to see safe standing introduced into a section of the stadium. The clue is in the word "safe", this is a tried and tested solution that bears absolutely no resemblance to traditional terracing.

That said, it's difficult to see how it could be implemented in our current stadium unless it was in a dedicated corner like they have at Celtic Park.

If they put Safe Standing into W7 for example then the folk at the back of W6 wouldn't be able to see to their left because every fecker in W7 would be stood up.

It could be done if it was tapered in such a way that it wouldn't break the line of sight for those sitting in W6.

It's a ridiculous idea, but, technically speaking, it could work....

 

20180612_093127.jpg

Edited by Drew

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not holding my breath. I also hold the opnion that if the club are seriously looking at increasing our stadium capacity, then their primary driving force in doing so will be to increase future OF fan income. They will do it if it gets more of them squeezed in, with more of their dollars raked in. A side benefit would be if Aberdeen, Hearts, Hibs, or even a resurgent Killie, were flying and their fans were mobilised in numbers too. Nice wee earner.

Anything else, including a shiny new safe standing area for OUR fans, and I firmly believe you are kidding yourself on. In a stadium that has NEVER sold out, even during a Championship winning season. Finally, IF they seriously start work on something like this, hold onto that SMiSA piggy bank extra hard folks, those of you with money regularly going into that ring-fenced for shares big pink ceramic porker.... batten down the hatch. In fact, get the Superglue out.

Edited by pozbaird

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've love to see safe standing introduced into a section of the stadium. The clue is in the word "safe", this is a tried and tested solution that bears absolutely no resemblance to traditional terracing.
That said, it's difficult to see how it could be implemented in our current stadium unless it was in a dedicated corner like they have at Celtic Park.
If they put Safe Standing into W7 for example then the folk at the back of W6 wouldn't be able to see to their left because every fecker in W7 would be stood up.

You take the back 5 rows out , the full length of west stand , so whole stand viewpoint at back is unrestricted & the 9 rows in front full length sit, job done.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, whydowebother said:


You take the back 5 rows out , the full length of west stand , so whole stand viewpoint at back is unrestricted & the 9 rows in front full length sit, job done.

 

Earplugs for the ones sitting in front. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, whydowebother said:


You take the back 5 rows out , the full length of west stand , so whole stand viewpoint at back is unrestricted & the 9 rows in front full length sit, job done.

 

Not. Sure. If. Serious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, pozbaird said:

Not holding my breath. I also hold the opnion that if the club are seriously looking at increasing our stadium capacity, then their primary driving force in doing so will be to increase future OF fan income. They will do it if it gets more of them squeezed in, with more of their dollars raked in. A side benefit would be if Aberdeen, Hearts, Hibs, or even a resurgent Killie, were flying and their fans were mobilised in numbers too. Nice wee earner.

Anything else, including a shiny new safe standing area for OUR fans, and I firmly believe you are kidding yourself on. In a stadium that has NEVER sold out, even during a Championship winning season. Finally, IF they seriously start work on something like this, hold onto that SMiSA piggy bank extra hard folks, those of you with money regularly going into that ring-fenced for shares big pink ceramic porker.... batten down the hatch. In fact, get the Superglue out.

This - but it's gonna take awhile if it's coming out of the three month spend. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Bud the Baker said:

This - but it's gonna take awhile if it's coming out of the three month spend. 

Clearly, not entirely funded from the bank of SMiSA, as it would be a major project, but if it isn’t tapped into in some way, with the precedent set already? I’ll be extremely surprised.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, StuD said:

To be honest I'd put a price of £30 per seat on safety since bog standard seats have improved stadium safety beyond any doubt since the Taylor Report. Standing has never been safer than sitting. Paying £50 per seat extra to reduce the level of safety in a football stadium is plain stupid. 

You're wrong there. 

Thats a false comparison. People are going to stand regardless. So the real safety comparison is: Do you want people standing at seats or do you want people standing at "safe standing"? 

The latter is clearly safer and therefore worth the 50 quid.

Edited by LargsBud

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, LargsBud said:

You're wrong there. 

Thats a false comparison. People are going to stand regardless. So the real safety comparison is: Do you want people standing at seats or do you want people standing at "safe standing"? 

The latter is clearly safer and therefore worth the 50 quid.

The answer I'll give is I'd want people sitting down, on seats, using football stadiums as they are designed to be used. 

However even with those dangerous rule breakers standing at all seater stadiums in the UK, you'd be hard pushed to find a single fatality that would have been prevented if only there weren't seats in the stadium. There is no legal or moral requirement on St Mirren to install safe standing, just some selfish demand from a minority of misguided football supporters who seem to think that standing up improves the atmosphere.

Just 500 of these seats would cost the club £40,000. They will bring in £0 extra in revenue. Imagine pursuing this demand and still claiming you are "superfans" :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

most practical and sensible way to " invest " money in our stadium , would be to explore a way to divide one of the ends into two , so we can accommodate an away crowd of say 2,000 , or be in a position to offer an away support 700 tickets and keep the rest of the stadium for our own fans .  

Share this post


Link to post
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...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...