Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Staying at/moving from the Valley. What's the business case?

1…911131415

Comments

  • se9addick
    se9addick Posts: 32,047
    up_the_valley said:
    ElfsborgAddick said:
    It'll be cheaper to pay Dushitelet than moving.
    Just say a new stadium with say a 40k capacity would cost 200m, are we better off just paying the 50m he wants for The Valley and training ground? Of course The Valley doesn't have much room for possible expansion.
    There were home matches last season when we had about 10,000 in the ground (max). Will worry about expansion once we’re regularly selling out.
  • bingaddick
    bingaddick Posts: 8,181
    Dippenhall said:
    So he could have said - “Never any possibility of leaving the Valley we’ll pay whatever Douchbag demands for acquiring the stadium”

    Or he could have said what he said.

    Chill.

    This!
  • fadgadget
    fadgadget Posts: 1,392
    People are saying there is no way we will be paying 1.5 million for a player , where are we going to get 40 million from to buy the ground  ? 
  • Braziliance
    Braziliance Posts: 8,359
    We need to spend a number of years in the top flight before we consider a stadium expansion. We basically need 2-3 new generations of consistent fans and that can only be achieve by being good at football, especially being a London club.

    Place could do with downsizing most match weeks. 
  • up_the_valley
    up_the_valley Posts: 4,213
    Braziliance said:
    We need to spend a number of years in the top flight before we consider a stadium expansion. We basically need 2-3 new generations of consistent fans and that can only be achieve by being good at football, especially being a London club.

    Place could do with downsizing most match weeks. 
    I understand this. Hence the word "possible."
  • AndyG
    AndyG Posts: 5,911
    There is zero chance of us moving from the Valley for any number of reasons.

    However it does raise an interesting point. If the club announced that they were planning a new stadium there would (rightly imo ) meltdown from the fans but other clubs like Everton, Spurs, West Ham etc have done so did their fans kick off ?
  • WSS
    WSS Posts: 25,070
    I think they’ll be a lot more open to it than you may think. Away from CL.

    The oldies and the history are fading away…
  • redbuttle
    redbuttle Posts: 1,983
    WSS said:
    I think they’ll be a lot more open to it than you may think. Away from CL.

    The oldies and the history are fading away…
    Unfortunately That's 100 percent right.
  • meldrew66
    meldrew66 Posts: 2,562
    edited June 21
    …..but if RD doesn’t agree to a longer lease in the next 12 months, we will breach EFLs requirement for a minimum 10 year lease on home grounds. RD will know this so, like it or not, he does hold all the cards right now. We need to start massaging his ego somewhat to get him to agree to the lease or, preferably, a sale otherwise we’re in big trouble very soon.
  • Jack_Charlton
    Jack_Charlton Posts: 338
    msomerton said:
    Moving would be a big blow to support. They need to agree a long term lease with The Duchalet family.
    Then get on with any changes to the ground they think will improve it.
    A move out and then building a new stadium is expensive. Given what Brentford spent on their new stadium 
    would say about£100 million for a new 15000 to 17000 stadium, and where is there room for that is South East London.
    Mountsfield park 👀 
  • Sponsored links:



  • Airman Brown
    Airman Brown Posts: 15,742
    meldrew66 said:
    …..but if RD doesn’t agree to a longer lease in the next 12 months, we will breach EFLs requirement for a minimum 10 year lease on home grounds. RD will know this so, like it or not, he does hold all the cards right now. We need to start massaging his ego somewhat to get him to agree to the lease or, preferably, a sale otherwise we’re in big trouble very soon.
    The lease is already under ten years, but that’s not the rule anyway.
  • ForestHillAddick
    ForestHillAddick Posts: 101
    It's a difficult one to play as a fan base as well. If we vehemently oppose moving from the valley then that strengthens RDs position. If we don't then there's a chance they may go ahead and actually move us, which nobody wants.
  • AndyG
    AndyG Posts: 5,911
    ForestHillAddick said:
    It's a difficult one to play as a fan base as well. If we vehemently oppose moving from the valley then that strengthens RDs position. If we don't then there's a chance they may go ahead and actually move us, which nobody wants.
    You say that and tbh from a sentimental viewpoint I agree but let’s be honest the valley isn’t exactly the easiest place to get to if you don’t live locally and the parking restrictions will only get worse 
  • Rothko
    Rothko Posts: 18,810
    It’ll cheaper to buy the Valley then even try and build in the area or even stupidly into Kent 
  • Braziliance
    Braziliance Posts: 8,359
    Our future will be here. All our fans live in Kent anyway  ;)


  • ElfsborgAddick
    ElfsborgAddick Posts: 29,074
    AndyG said:
    ForestHillAddick said:
    It's a difficult one to play as a fan base as well. If we vehemently oppose moving from the valley then that strengthens RDs position. If we don't then there's a chance they may go ahead and actually move us, which nobody wants.
    You say that and tbh from a sentimental viewpoint I agree but let’s be honest the valley isn’t exactly the easiest place to get to if you don’t live locally and the parking restrictions will only get worse 
    A good train service makes things easy.
  • ElliotCAFC
    ElliotCAFC Posts: 2,553
    We simply can’t move from The Valley. Charlton play at The Valley in SE7, end of. 

    Any notion of moving should be shot down at the earliest opportunity. 
  • up_the_valley
    up_the_valley Posts: 4,213
    edited June 21
    AndyG said:
    There is zero chance of us moving from the Valley for any number of reasons.

    However it does raise an interesting point. If the club announced that they were planning a new stadium there would (rightly imo ) meltdown from the fans but other clubs like Everton, Spurs, West Ham etc have done so did their fans kick off ?
    I think the difference is "why" have we moved from The Valley. The clubs you mentioned moved due to a need for a larger, modern stadium. If we moved, the reasons would be because of a previous stubborn owner. If it was on our terms I think there would be less protest.
  • InspectorSands
    InspectorSands Posts: 5,188
    AndyG said:
    ForestHillAddick said:
    It's a difficult one to play as a fan base as well. If we vehemently oppose moving from the valley then that strengthens RDs position. If we don't then there's a chance they may go ahead and actually move us, which nobody wants.
    You say that and tbh from a sentimental viewpoint I agree but let’s be honest the valley isn’t exactly the easiest place to get to if you don’t live locally and the parking restrictions will only get worse 
    As it is for every other club in London.  That said, there's an issue with just about everybody in a position of responsibility being in denial about just how people are meant to travel to/from a midweek match from, say, Meopham. 
  • up_the_valley
    up_the_valley Posts: 4,213
    InspectorSands said:
    AndyG said:
    ForestHillAddick said:
    It's a difficult one to play as a fan base as well. If we vehemently oppose moving from the valley then that strengthens RDs position. If we don't then there's a chance they may go ahead and actually move us, which nobody wants.
    You say that and tbh from a sentimental viewpoint I agree but let’s be honest the valley isn’t exactly the easiest place to get to if you don’t live locally and the parking restrictions will only get worse 
    As it is for every other club in London.  That said, there's an issue with just about everybody in a position of responsibility being in denial about just how people are meant to travel to/from a midweek match from, say, Meopham. 
    We wouldn't be Charlton anymore. We would become Meopham Athletic. The name says it all.
  • Sponsored links:



  • paulsturgess
    paulsturgess Posts: 3,809
    ElfsborgAddick said:
    AndyG said:
    ForestHillAddick said:
    It's a difficult one to play as a fan base as well. If we vehemently oppose moving from the valley then that strengthens RDs position. If we don't then there's a chance they may go ahead and actually move us, which nobody wants.
    You say that and tbh from a sentimental viewpoint I agree but let’s be honest the valley isn’t exactly the easiest place to get to if you don’t live locally and the parking restrictions will only get worse 
    A good train service makes things easy.
    I mean the away entrance is 300m from the station
  • InspectorSands
    InspectorSands Posts: 5,188
    I think there's a scenario that could go like this. It's possible that ship has already sailed, or isn't going to happen because it won't get the funding, but...

    The transformation of the Charlton riverside into a residential area isn't going very well for a number of reasons. One of those reasons is that the land's all owned by different parties who are basically sitting on it. Others are a lack of infrastructure (it needs at least one road driven through it and then some public transport) and general trouble for developers at the moment. One of the solutions I've heard kicked around is that the mayor steps in and forms a development corporation to buy up land and force the pace of development. This is what happened at the Olympic Park, and is happening at Old Oak Common where the HS2 station will be. 

    There's a plausible case for saying that a new state-of-the-art stadium on the north side of Woolwich Road, with housing/other uses alongside and even inside (look at how Wembley has changed) could be a project to try to force the pace a bit. Some of that land's spoken for now (two big developments are approved just west of the barrier), but certainly Stone Lake Retail Park, Stone Foundries (which is empty), the Selco site and industrial site behind could offer you possibilities. 

    I don't think it'll happen because the council treats the club like a problem and City Hall doesn't know we exist, and it'd have to involve them to work. But if the riverside redevelopment continues to stall, you never know. 

    Would rather stay at The Valley, though. It's home. 
  • up_the_valley
    up_the_valley Posts: 4,213
    bobmunro said:
    up_the_valley said:
    AndyG said:
    There is zero chance of us moving from the Valley for any number of reasons.

    However it does raise an interesting point. If the club announced that they were planning a new stadium there would (rightly imo ) meltdown from the fans but other clubs like Everton, Spurs, West Ham etc have done so did their fans kick off ?
    I think the difference is "why" have we moved from The Valley. The clubs you mentioned moved due to a need for a larger, modern stadium. If we moved, the reasons would be because of a previous stubborn owner. If it was on our terms I think there would be less protest.

    The difference is that Everton didn't lose Goodison and fight to get it back - the same for Spurs, Arsenal, Wet Spam, Citeh et al.

    We lost The Valley and through the enormous efforts of Charlton legends we got it back. The 5th December 1992 is for me the most important date in our history - eclipsing anything in 1947 and 1905.

    We cannot and will not leave The Valley.
    But just say, for example.... IF we became a hugely successful side and our capacity was no longer adequate for the demand. Should we stay in a stadium because we lost and regained it (we don't even own it now).
  • bobmunro
    bobmunro Posts: 20,851
    up_the_valley said:
    bobmunro said:
    up_the_valley said:
    AndyG said:
    There is zero chance of us moving from the Valley for any number of reasons.

    However it does raise an interesting point. If the club announced that they were planning a new stadium there would (rightly imo ) meltdown from the fans but other clubs like Everton, Spurs, West Ham etc have done so did their fans kick off ?
    I think the difference is "why" have we moved from The Valley. The clubs you mentioned moved due to a need for a larger, modern stadium. If we moved, the reasons would be because of a previous stubborn owner. If it was on our terms I think there would be less protest.

    The difference is that Everton didn't lose Goodison and fight to get it back - the same for Spurs, Arsenal, Wet Spam, Citeh et al.

    We lost The Valley and through the enormous efforts of Charlton legends we got it back. The 5th December 1992 is for me the most important date in our history - eclipsing anything in 1947 and 1905.

    We cannot and will not leave The Valley.
    But just say, for example.... IF we became a hugely successful side and our capacity was no longer adequate for the demand. Should we stay in a stadium because we lost and regained it (we don't even own it now).

    Yes
  • valleynick66
    valleynick66 Posts: 4,891
    We don’t need a bigger stadium. 

    We don’t have owners investing the amount needed to build new. 

    We will carry on as we are and negotiate something with RD. 
  • paulsturgess
    paulsturgess Posts: 3,809
    Do we have an option to buy from Roland that we can implement at any time we want? Ie if we somehow managed to fluke our way to the prem… surely the owners would then do this?
  • ElfsborgAddick
    ElfsborgAddick Posts: 29,074
    up_the_valley said:
    bobmunro said:
    up_the_valley said:
    AndyG said:
    There is zero chance of us moving from the Valley for any number of reasons.

    However it does raise an interesting point. If the club announced that they were planning a new stadium there would (rightly imo ) meltdown from the fans but other clubs like Everton, Spurs, West Ham etc have done so did their fans kick off ?
    I think the difference is "why" have we moved from The Valley. The clubs you mentioned moved due to a need for a larger, modern stadium. If we moved, the reasons would be because of a previous stubborn owner. If it was on our terms I think there would be less protest.

    The difference is that Everton didn't lose Goodison and fight to get it back - the same for Spurs, Arsenal, Wet Spam, Citeh et al.

    We lost The Valley and through the enormous efforts of Charlton legends we got it back. The 5th December 1992 is for me the most important date in our history - eclipsing anything in 1947 and 1905.

    We cannot and will not leave The Valley.
    But just say, for example.... IF we became a hugely successful side and our capacity was no longer adequate for the demand. Should we stay in a stadium because we lost and regained it (we don't even own it now).
    Yes, we redevelop to the away end to a wrap around to make it the best part of 40k
  • IanJRO
    IanJRO Posts: 691
    Braziliance said:
    Our future will be here. All our fans live in Kent anyway  ;)


    Perfect, could walk to the ground!
  • jimmymelrose
    jimmymelrose Posts: 9,753
    Everyone is always going on about parking restrictions around The Valley. 

    How far from the ground do these go, and why are there so many more than in the past?

    Can you still park around Charlton Park for example?
    If it’s really not possible to park within, let’s say, a 20 minute walk, how are supporters from Kent supposed to get to the match - drive within 3-4 miles and get the bus? That must be putting a lot of fans off.

Categories

“Marketplace”