[cite]Posted By: Henry Irving[/cite]When and if a 40k capacity is a problem then we should look to move to another site IMHO. Doubt that will be an issue for a year or so : - )
Personally I haven't got a problem with another site. All depends what and where.
I agree. Target 40,000 should be a staging post to something greater/larger but we need to get there first!
A question I have, is how wealthy is Jimmenz. If this club is to get into the premiership within the next 5 years then it will cost a lot of money. For example at the present rate of loss then after 5 years he will have had to sub the club 20 million pounds. But of course to get pomoted will cost more than the current team budget and so losses will go up. It would seemt me that he will not get much change out of one hundred million pounds just to get us into the premiership, can he afford that.
[cite]Posted By: razil[/cite]I guess my point is that if your eventual aim were be a top level club, why would you develop a site further that can never meet that demand.
The things is we could build the UK's equivalent of the Bernabau and then not get more than 15,000 in it each game.
You have to deal with reality. You can still have goals that move you beyond that.
When the club went back to the Valley, the stadium held just over 8,000. That was the reality. They could have tried to build the 30,000 seater stadium originally planned but that was too much of a pipe dream especially during the economic times that then prevailed.
The club went for an incremental growth strategy. Back to the Valley, with fan base growth plans to 10,000, then to 20,000. That co-incided with gradual improvement on the pitch leading eventually to a team capable of getting us up and eventually staying there. The next target was 40,000.
Where we are now, the imperative is to get out of this division as soon as possible, whilst growing and improving the footballing side of the club so that if we go up, we can consolidate and go again. If those goals are achieved, the club will have a greater value and potential return for its current investors who could increase their investment, bring in new investors, or sell up. The aim once back in the Premier League has to be to stay there this time. In order for us to sustain this, we will need a wider fan base. The Thames Gateway is a huge opportunity to tap into a new fan base. Only then will they perhaps look to grow the Valley to the 40,000 level. Anything beyond that is only a dream at this stage.
I believe it was Steve Waggott rather than Peter Varney who pushed the facile and fallacious argument that the Thames Gateway (and "The Olympics") would somehow boost our attendances. Lets be quite clear, there are more than enough people in the catchment area with Charlton links who could take our capacity beyond 30,000, which would fill up the next stage of the Valley redevelopment. Planning for anything beyond 40,000 was presumptious even when we were in the FAPL.
The Valley is a key part of the Charlton brand. Many away supporters comment that they enjoy coming to the Valley because its a 'proper' stadium. If we really think we should attract people with no previous family allegiance to Charlton - which I think is unnecessary anyway - we should use the Valley as part of the appeal.
Anyway we wont need more than 40k even in the FAPL. people are going to get sick of the FAPL, and the attendances will tail off. Has nobody ever learned from the property market that no markets keep growing for ever?
There are many outstandings questions concerning the takeover and I would remind all Charlton fans that Richard Murray will be holding a "Question & Answers Session" at the Inaugural Meeting of the Ashford & Shepway Addicks Supporter's Branch commencing 7.30pm this coming Thursday evening 20th January at Ashford Hockey Club, Ball Lane, Kennington, Ashford, Kent, TN25 4EB. Admission is free and all Charlton supporters are welcome to attend.
You may be right PA about the direction of travel. I am not certain that the trend is downwards in the long term though.
I have no desire for us to move from the Valley. I acknowledge that there could at some future juncture, be a rationale for it. I can't see it with the current fan base.
I do believe that 40,000 plus is possible and we do have a huge catchment area, Thames Gateway or not. That catchment area is a potential source of additional fans. I also believe that over the years the work done by the Target 10,000 team and those that followed did produce so real results and those results have lead to a more engaged fan base which has stood us in good stead in terms of keeping the attendances up. If you go back to the 1960's and 70's our attending fan base dropped to around 7,000 during those years and we didn't regain significant numbers when we got back to the top flight, because of the disastrous decision to leave the Valley.
So Target 40,000 is within our reach if we get back to the Premier League but it is going to require some innovative approaches to reach out within the catchment area.
It also seems to me that there is no problem having a dream of a massive club of Man U sized support. Its not remotely likely but the dream is not ignoble in my view.
I am not certain if it was Waggott who's drive was towards the Thames Gateway. I wouldn't fight you on that but as Waggott didn't take over as CEO until we were relegated, my recollection was that it was already being mentioned during the days of Peter Varney's stewardship.
Anyway, once back in the Premier League, the first thing they need to do is fill the existing stadium before looking at increasing to 40K, let alone beyond it.
PDV was pushing this angle for a while for he left in 2008 but here's a quote from when he first left.
[i]"However, he thinks that Charlton, aided by the redevelopment of the South East London area, has the potential to grow into an even bigger club.
He added: "With what's going on in this region in the next few years, with the Olympics and the building of about 150,000 homes on our doorstep in the Thames Gateway, there is a massive potential at this club."[/i]
The Thames gateway developments could boost attendances but you need to have a product that will attract people. League 1 football does not attract and to be fair Championship would increase support somewhat but not incredibly. Premiership football makes all the difference- many non Charlton fans who are in the area will find it attractive to buy a season ticket to watch the best players in the best league in the World. They may then become Charlton fans but to unlock the potential, we need to get ourselves out of the hole we are in.
The thing about marketing is, its not rocket science . Always beware of people using loads of jargon complicated ideas, and vague grand sweeps of the hand while uttering "Thames Gateway, London Olympics"
Think about it like this. Is there really anyone here who cannot think of a minimum two more people whom at a pinch they could get to The Valley? Probably family, possibly friends. Right then, based on an average gate of 14,000 thats 42,000 just by getting our own friends and family to come. In the Thames gateway you will have a lot of people who dont like football, and the rest will have an allegiance to other clubs. Whats the point of imagining they are all going to come, let alone blowing marketing money at them? If they are Charlton fans, well they are not going to come again just because they moved house.
Beware the Thames Gateway myth! and beware even more the idea that we need to move from The Valley.
[cite]Posted By: razil[/cite]I guess my point is that if your eventual aim were be a top level club, why would you develop a site further that can never meet that demand.
The things is we could build the UK's equivalent of the Bernabau and then not get more than 15,000 in it each game.
You have to deal with reality. You can still have goals that move you beyond that.
When the club went back to the Valley, the stadium held just over 8,000. That was the reality. They could have tried to build the 30,000 seater stadium originally planned but that was too much of a pipe dream especially during the economic times that then prevailed.
The club went for an incremental growth strategy. Back to the Valley, with fan base growth plans to 10,000, then to 20,000. That co-incided with gradual improvement on the pitch leading eventually to a team capable of getting us up and eventually staying there. The next target was 40,000.
Where we are now, the imperative is to get out of this division as soon as possible, whilst growing and improving the footballing side of the club so that if we go up, we can consolidate and go again. If those goals are achieved, the club will have a greater value and potential return for its current investors who could increase their investment, bring in new investors, or sell up. The aim once back in the Premier League has to be to stay there this time. In order for us to sustain this, we will need a wider fan base. The Thames Gateway is a huge opportunity to tap into a new fan base. Only then will they perhaps look to grow the Valley to the 40,000 level. Anything beyond that is only a dream at this stage.
Hi Bing, I am not in disagreement at all with your points, but based on a scenario where an owner wanted to compete at the highest level they would want 60-80k stadium potential on the site, since its reasonably safe to assume you wouldn't get that at the valley, I'm just saying it wouldn't make sense to continue to invest in the existing site. I personally would hate to move to a characterless ground like the washing up bowl they call the emirates, indeed sadly some of the new development of the Valley has arguably detracted a little bit from the atmosphere with the way the roof acoustics works on the covered end, and can't compete with JS for noise, ah well.
You put me bang to rights there. Although I distinctly remember Waggott banging on about the same potential in his programme notes. Nevertheless, i think Peter's wrong and would happily tell him so.
[cite]Posted By: MuttleyCAFC[/cite]Premiership football makes all the difference- many non Charlton fans who are in the area will find it attractive to buy a season ticket to watch the best players in the best league in the World.
Well, it would be interesting to know what proportion of our season ticket holders in the Prem fell into that category. I know there were some, but I suspect less than you think. Suppose you were relocated to Birmingham tomorrow. Would you buy a season ticket to Villa or City for that reason? The odd game maybe, but a season ticket? And wouldn't you first want to have some mates to go with?
[cite]Posted By: PragueAddick[/cite]The thing about marketing is, its not rocket science . Always beware of people using loads of jargon complicated ideas, and vague grand sweeps of the hand while uttering "Thames Gateway, London Olympics"
Like Peter Varney you mean? : - )
PA, your two people theory doesn't work as quite often we ST holders will know the same two people.
Of the group of 6 of us who used to go together two no longer go. One could be tempted back and get a ST and the other will come to occasional games but that's two not ten as in your calculation.
Yes, better always to go back to known customers but a large pool of potential new customers is not to be sniffed at.
If there are a 160k new homes with 3 people on average in each that is 480 potential fans. If we could sell a ST to 1% of them that is 4800 extra fans every week.
Anyway this is just why it would be useful to know the outline of the business plan. Business Development seems to be PDVs role and we know he's good at that.
Talking up Thames Gateway/Olympics could be partly about selling the Club by talking up the fringe benefits but there could also be some real potential gains.
[cite]Posted By: Henry Irving[/cite]If there are a 160k new homes with 3 people on average in each that is 480 potential fans. If we could sell a ST to 1% of them that is 4800 extra fans every week.
yes but they are not relocating from Planet Zog are they? A large proportion of them may already be living in the catchment area. Like Thamesmead
[cite]Posted By: Henry Irving[/cite]Anyway this is just why it would be useful to know the outline of the business plan. Business Development seems to be PDVs role and we know he's good at that.
Talking up Thames Gateway/Olympics could be partly about selling the Club by talking up the fringe benefits but there could also be some real potential gains.
[cite]Posted By: Henry Irving[/cite]If there are a 160k new homes with 3 people on average in each that is 480 potential fans. If we could sell a ST to 1% of them that is 4800 extra fans every week.
yes but they are not relocating from Planet Zog are they? A large proportion of them may already be living in the catchment area. Like Thamesmead
[cite]Posted By: Henry Irving[/cite]Anyway this is just why it would be useful to know the outline of the business plan. Business Development seems to be PDVs role and we know he's good at that.
Talking up Thames Gateway/Olympics could be partly about selling the Club by talking up the fringe benefits but there could also be some real potential gains.
PA, let me ask you this. If you were running a local business and you were looking to grow your customer base, and then somebody comes along and creates 160,000 new homes "on your doorstep", wouldn't you want to try and market what you do to them?
Getting existing customers to tell their mates is also a good plan. Why shouldn't a successful business try to do both.
I know a lot of older Addick fans who have only become fans in recent years because they lived in proximity to a Premier League club. We don't all go back to the old days of yore.
Part of the decline in football support in the 60s, and 70s was because the product wasn't brilliant and the experience on the day was macho, racist, tarnished with violence, lack of safety and comfort.
Huge strides have been taken change the image of football. Society has also changed in this time. Many more women go to football than ever before and when you take your kids they can actually watch the game in comfort without people peeing in their pockets.
Our club made great strides in reaching out to its community. I see the potential to reach a new even wider local audience as being part of this process of change, and not a fools paradise to be ignored.
[cite]Posted By: razil[/cite]Hi Bing, I am not in disagreement at all with your points, but based on a scenario where an owner wanted to compete at the highest level they would want 60-80k stadium potential on the site, since its reasonably safe to assume you wouldn't get that at the valley, I'm just saying it wouldn't make sense to continue to invest in the existing site. I personally would hate to move to a characterless ground like the washing up bowl they call the emirates, indeed sadly some of the new development of the Valley has arguably detracted a little bit from the atmosphere with the way the roof acoustics works on the covered end, and can't compete with JS for noise, ah well.
I understand the point you are making, I just think from an investors perspective, that scenario is too risky given where we are. It is I confess possible to think of a scenario where a new 30-40,000 seater stadium was built with the potential to go higher. I can't be certain that that is not in the plan somewhere but I just don't think the current fan base will stomach it. It seems to me that to press ahead an alienate your current customer base isn't a good business plan.
In five years or so, if we are back who knows how people may feel, given a cogent presentation.
Right the first question I have is where exactly are these 160,000 homes? I had a quick look around, and correct me if I am wrong, but the development all seems to be north of the river. In which case can anyone tell me how these 4,800 new supporters are going to get across the river on our already overloaded roads and non existent public transport, and how many times they are likely to do this once they've missed a kick off because plod has closed the Dartford Crossing?
[cite]Posted By: bingaddick[/cite]PA, let me ask you this. If you were running a local business and you were looking to grow your customer base, and then somebody comes along and creates 160,000 new homes "on your doorstep", wouldn't you want to try and market what you do to them?
Getting existing customers to tell their mates is also a good plan. Why shouldn't a successful business try to do both.
Well, it all depends on whether "trying" involves spending money. If we just note the rising population, and use it for broader purposes as Henry suggested earlier, then fine. If it involves anything else, it will be a waste of money. Any successful business targets the group most easily converted into customers.
Really we need the club's best marketing man here - Airman Brown - and he may well disagree with me, but I think that what Valley Express shows is that potential supporters are not concentrated in one place. Nor is location the key factor. Apart from the football there are other things which stop them, like easy transport to and from the ground. Valley Express is one way to address that barrier to attendance.
PragueAddick, it may be worth taking a look in more detail at the Thames gateway project, it is truly massive. Two short extracts below, but check it out, Wiki link is a good starting point.
The Thames Gateway Region consists of a 40-mile stretch of land along the River Thames. It is the focus for the biggest building programme to be undertaken in the UK for over 50 years with close to 200,000 new homes to be built. This new interdisciplinary project has been launched to focus on making geoscience information for the Thames Gateway more accessible, relevant and understandable to the wide range of users involved in the sustainable regeneration and development of the Gateway.
The Thames Gateway is an area of land stretching 70 kilometres (43 mi) east from inner east London on both sides of the River Thames and the Thames Estuary [1]. The area, which includes much brownfield land, has been designated a national priority for urban regeneration, taking advantage of the development opportunities realised by the completion of the High Speed 1 (officially known as the Channel Tunnel Rail Link) rail line.[2] It stretches from Westferry in Tower Hamlets to the Isle of Sheppey and extends across three of the regions of England. The development is delivered through regional development agencies, special purpose development corporations and local partnerships.
I have to say that I thought from what I'd read that the development is both sides of the river and that bears it out.
I am not suggesting that targeting this development corridor is the be all and end all but by God if I was running the club I'd certainly be looking in that direction.
Henry has already backed up my memory that the club was looking to exploit that development in when PV was CEO back in the Premier League. Indeed, if I am not mistaken, the club were talking about getting involved with a welcome pack for new residents that included some free tickets to matches. That may be a bad idea but at the time it struck me as a real innovation.
If you look at the Palace Directors thread that Henry posted up, in the interview film link, they talk about how difficult it is to increase revenues and working within the community. Our club already is light years ahead of them. Target new residents is at least superficially, an innovative way to grow additional fans.
[cite]Posted By: PragueAddick[/cite]Valley Express is one way to address that barrier to attendance.
Correct me if I am wrong but the Valley Express initiative was largely to connect to existing fans who, for what ever reason, were unwilling or had lost the habit of going to games rather than snapping up new fans although I am sure some new fans did come along from it.
The targeting of the Thames Gateway housing development is about tapping into a new set of uncommitted potential fans and getting them involved in the wider community via the Club. I could however envisage us running coaches picking up and putting down in these areas as the development gathers pace.
[cite]Posted By: bingaddick[/cite]Correct me if I am wrong but the Valley Express initiative was largely to connect to existing fans who, for what ever reason, were unwilling or had lost the habit of going to games rather than snapping up new fans although I am sure some new fans did come along from it.
Yes that's what it is. That is my point. There are thousands of people out there who if pressed to name a club they 'support' will name Charlton. You are more likely to be successful if you reach out to them with something which addresses a reason why they don't go. Some of them may move to the Thames gateway. So reach out to them. But not the whole bloody lot, some of them living 40 miles away on the wrong side of the river.
But lets see what the Airman may have to say about it.
Can someone please explain Richard Murray's Definition of 'Football people'?
Because I hardly think that a bloke who plays in goal part time in the Epsom veterans five-a-side league as well as a fella that used to run a cleaning and valet company in the chelsea players car park constitute as ' football people '.
What I think is that if the local population increases that gives you a larger number of people to target, but like Prague Addick I am very suspicious of the idea that Thames Gateway development and still less the Olympics are game-changers for CAFC. I think if you get the offer on and off the pitch right and your marketing messages are sound you will benefit from the Thames Gateway, but I am not sure the messages are significantly different for people who move into new developments to those for the general population. However, I think it's fair to say the emphasis on the TG and the Olympics did originate with PV, and that many of us involved in developing support do see things differently to him on this. I don't think Steve Waggott added anything to this debate.
If I were to move a long way away, say to Lancaster (my wife was offered a really good job up there a couple of years ago) I would cast around for a game to go to...Morcombe or something, Lancaster City....so if people re-settle down near us, whatever their loyalties....if we made it easy to come to the Valley, then the extra people may well mean more income.
Comments
I agree. Target 40,000 should be a staging post to something greater/larger but we need to get there first!
It would seemt me that he will not get much change out of one hundred million pounds just to get us into the premiership, can he afford that.
The things is we could build the UK's equivalent of the Bernabau and then not get more than 15,000 in it each game.
You have to deal with reality. You can still have goals that move you beyond that.
When the club went back to the Valley, the stadium held just over 8,000. That was the reality. They could have tried to build the 30,000 seater stadium originally planned but that was too much of a pipe dream especially during the economic times that then prevailed.
The club went for an incremental growth strategy. Back to the Valley, with fan base growth plans to 10,000, then to 20,000. That co-incided with gradual improvement on the pitch leading eventually to a team capable of getting us up and eventually staying there. The next target was 40,000.
Where we are now, the imperative is to get out of this division as soon as possible, whilst growing and improving the footballing side of the club so that if we go up, we can consolidate and go again. If those goals are achieved, the club will have a greater value and potential return for its current investors who could increase their investment, bring in new investors, or sell up. The aim once back in the Premier League has to be to stay there this time. In order for us to sustain this, we will need a wider fan base. The Thames Gateway is a huge opportunity to tap into a new fan base. Only then will they perhaps look to grow the Valley to the 40,000 level. Anything beyond that is only a dream at this stage.
The Valley is a key part of the Charlton brand. Many away supporters comment that they enjoy coming to the Valley because its a 'proper' stadium. If we really think we should attract people with no previous family allegiance to Charlton - which I think is unnecessary anyway - we should use the Valley as part of the appeal.
Anyway we wont need more than 40k even in the FAPL. people are going to get sick of the FAPL, and the attendances will tail off. Has nobody ever learned from the property market that no markets keep growing for ever?
I'm trying not to read anything into the name "Butcher Burns"!!
I have no desire for us to move from the Valley. I acknowledge that there could at some future juncture, be a rationale for it. I can't see it with the current fan base.
I do believe that 40,000 plus is possible and we do have a huge catchment area, Thames Gateway or not. That catchment area is a potential source of additional fans. I also believe that over the years the work done by the Target 10,000 team and those that followed did produce so real results and those results have lead to a more engaged fan base which has stood us in good stead in terms of keeping the attendances up. If you go back to the 1960's and 70's our attending fan base dropped to around 7,000 during those years and we didn't regain significant numbers when we got back to the top flight, because of the disastrous decision to leave the Valley.
So Target 40,000 is within our reach if we get back to the Premier League but it is going to require some innovative approaches to reach out within the catchment area.
It also seems to me that there is no problem having a dream of a massive club of Man U sized support. Its not remotely likely but the dream is not ignoble in my view.
I am not certain if it was Waggott who's drive was towards the Thames Gateway. I wouldn't fight you on that but as Waggott didn't take over as CEO until we were relegated, my recollection was that it was already being mentioned during the days of Peter Varney's stewardship.
Anyway, once back in the Premier League, the first thing they need to do is fill the existing stadium before looking at increasing to 40K, let alone beyond it.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/c/charlton_athletic/7283090.stm
PDV was pushing this angle for a while for he left in 2008 but here's a quote from when he first left.
[i]"However, he thinks that Charlton, aided by the redevelopment of the South East London area, has the potential to grow into an even bigger club.
He added: "With what's going on in this region in the next few years, with the Olympics and the building of about 150,000 homes on our doorstep in the Thames Gateway, there is a massive potential at this club."[/i]
Think about it like this. Is there really anyone here who cannot think of a minimum two more people whom at a pinch they could get to The Valley? Probably family, possibly friends. Right then, based on an average gate of 14,000 thats 42,000 just by getting our own friends and family to come. In the Thames gateway you will have a lot of people who dont like football, and the rest will have an allegiance to other clubs. Whats the point of imagining they are all going to come, let alone blowing marketing money at them? If they are Charlton fans, well they are not going to come again just because they moved house.
Beware the Thames Gateway myth! and beware even more the idea that we need to move from The Valley.
Hi Bing, I am not in disagreement at all with your points, but based on a scenario where an owner wanted to compete at the highest level they would want 60-80k stadium potential on the site, since its reasonably safe to assume you wouldn't get that at the valley, I'm just saying it wouldn't make sense to continue to invest in the existing site. I personally would hate to move to a characterless ground like the washing up bowl they call the emirates, indeed sadly some of the new development of the Valley has arguably detracted a little bit from the atmosphere with the way the roof acoustics works on the covered end, and can't compete with JS for noise, ah well.
You put me bang to rights there. Although I distinctly remember Waggott banging on about the same potential in his programme notes. Nevertheless, i think Peter's wrong and would happily tell him so.
Well, it would be interesting to know what proportion of our season ticket holders in the Prem fell into that category. I know there were some, but I suspect less than you think. Suppose you were relocated to Birmingham tomorrow. Would you buy a season ticket to Villa or City for that reason? The odd game maybe, but a season ticket? And wouldn't you first want to have some mates to go with?
Like Peter Varney you mean? : - )
PA, your two people theory doesn't work as quite often we ST holders will know the same two people.
Of the group of 6 of us who used to go together two no longer go. One could be tempted back and get a ST and the other will come to occasional games but that's two not ten as in your calculation.
Yes, better always to go back to known customers but a large pool of potential new customers is not to be sniffed at.
If there are a 160k new homes with 3 people on average in each that is 480 potential fans. If we could sell a ST to 1% of them that is 4800 extra fans every week.
Anyway this is just why it would be useful to know the outline of the business plan. Business Development seems to be PDVs role and we know he's good at that.
Talking up Thames Gateway/Olympics could be partly about selling the Club by talking up the fringe benefits but there could also be some real potential gains.
yes but they are not relocating from Planet Zog are they? A large proportion of them may already be living in the catchment area. Like Thamesmead
Fair enough. let's see what we can find out.
True but that's why I suggested 1%
Getting existing customers to tell their mates is also a good plan. Why shouldn't a successful business try to do both.
I know a lot of older Addick fans who have only become fans in recent years because they lived in proximity to a Premier League club. We don't all go back to the old days of yore.
Part of the decline in football support in the 60s, and 70s was because the product wasn't brilliant and the experience on the day was macho, racist, tarnished with violence, lack of safety and comfort.
Huge strides have been taken change the image of football. Society has also changed in this time. Many more women go to football than ever before and when you take your kids they can actually watch the game in comfort without people peeing in their pockets.
Our club made great strides in reaching out to its community. I see the potential to reach a new even wider local audience as being part of this process of change, and not a fools paradise to be ignored.
I understand the point you are making, I just think from an investors perspective, that scenario is too risky given where we are. It is I confess possible to think of a scenario where a new 30-40,000 seater stadium was built with the potential to go higher. I can't be certain that that is not in the plan somewhere but I just don't think the current fan base will stomach it. It seems to me that to press ahead an alienate your current customer base isn't a good business plan.
In five years or so, if we are back who knows how people may feel, given a cogent presentation.
Well, it all depends on whether "trying" involves spending money. If we just note the rising population, and use it for broader purposes as Henry suggested earlier, then fine. If it involves anything else, it will be a waste of money. Any successful business targets the group most easily converted into customers.
Really we need the club's best marketing man here - Airman Brown - and he may well disagree with me, but I think that what Valley Express shows is that potential supporters are not concentrated in one place. Nor is location the key factor. Apart from the football there are other things which stop them, like easy transport to and from the ground. Valley Express is one way to address that barrier to attendance.
The Thames Gateway Region consists of a 40-mile stretch of land along the River Thames. It is the focus for the biggest building programme to be undertaken in the UK for over 50 years with close to 200,000 new homes to be built. This new interdisciplinary project has been launched to focus on making geoscience information for the Thames Gateway more accessible, relevant and understandable to the wide range of users involved in the sustainable regeneration and development of the Gateway.
The Thames Gateway is an area of land stretching 70 kilometres (43 mi) east from inner east London on both sides of the River Thames and the Thames Estuary [1]. The area, which includes much brownfield land, has been designated a national priority for urban regeneration, taking advantage of the development opportunities realised by the completion of the High Speed 1 (officially known as the Channel Tunnel Rail Link) rail line.[2] It stretches from Westferry in Tower Hamlets to the Isle of Sheppey and extends across three of the regions of England. The development is delivered through regional development agencies, special purpose development corporations and local partnerships.
Wiki link
I am not suggesting that targeting this development corridor is the be all and end all but by God if I was running the club I'd certainly be looking in that direction.
Henry has already backed up my memory that the club was looking to exploit that development in when PV was CEO back in the Premier League. Indeed, if I am not mistaken, the club were talking about getting involved with a welcome pack for new residents that included some free tickets to matches. That may be a bad idea but at the time it struck me as a real innovation.
If you look at the Palace Directors thread that Henry posted up, in the interview film link, they talk about how difficult it is to increase revenues and working within the community. Our club already is light years ahead of them. Target new residents is at least superficially, an innovative way to grow additional fans.
Correct me if I am wrong but the Valley Express initiative was largely to connect to existing fans who, for what ever reason, were unwilling or had lost the habit of going to games rather than snapping up new fans although I am sure some new fans did come along from it.
The targeting of the Thames Gateway housing development is about tapping into a new set of uncommitted potential fans and getting them involved in the wider community via the Club. I could however envisage us running coaches picking up and putting down in these areas as the development gathers pace.
Yes that's what it is. That is my point. There are thousands of people out there who if pressed to name a club they 'support' will name Charlton. You are more likely to be successful if you reach out to them with something which addresses a reason why they don't go. Some of them may move to the Thames gateway. So reach out to them. But not the whole bloody lot, some of them living 40 miles away on the wrong side of the river.
But lets see what the Airman may have to say about it.
No problem, it will be interesting to learn his views.
Can someone please explain Richard Murray's Definition of 'Football people'?
Because I hardly think that a bloke who plays in goal part time in the Epsom veterans five-a-side league as well as a fella that used to run a cleaning and valet company in the chelsea players car park constitute as ' football people '.