I still believe he will sell the football club but retain the Valley and lease it back. The same as Barry Hearn has done at Orient, and what RD has done at St T.
Exactly. One of the big questions is which entity would own and profit from a redeveloped JS, CAFC or Staprix? I would bet on it being Staprix. We might even find the club having to rent the "stand" part of the redevelopment back from Staprix.
There's a limit to the extent to which you can extend the east stand. Under the previous scheme, which has already been compromised by the sale of 2 Lansdowne Mews, the capacity would only have increased by 3,000. Access is an issue, not just for the steel, etc, but for fans. The potential is mainly at the Jimmy Seed end, because of the relative lack of height issues.
Can't build anything when equipment is not working or the builders are tied up on stakes with fire around their feet or the money Man is hanging upside down from a stake being dunked in to the Thames
Asked a friend who works for DNC about Cahones, and the message back is pretty vicious in its criticism of him, and the surprise he's been allowed near the top of any organisation
And there we have it! Now promoted to a level of incompetence as Chief Operations Officer or similar job title.
I've worked for successful blue chip companies as far as perceived reputation goes, that have been littered with promoting the incompetent, the militant that shout about how everything that they do wrong is someone else's fault, the brown nosers, the people that go on and on about how great their work is when it's the work of their colleagues. They promote these various different types of imbecile up and up the corporate ranks.
At the same time, good people get sick of things and move on to pastures new. How do these companies still function and make profit?
There was a Belgian engineering graduate posting on ITTV recently. He said that, when he graduated, Melexis, etc (RD's electronics empire) was seen as a great place for the ambitious young graduate to go because RD has a habit of promoting young graduates straight into senior positions.
I think that puts not only the commercial management of the club, but also the choice of head coaches into a true perspective. RD will just cycle through these people until he gets ones that he thinks are good, but his definition of good is different from ours - obviously.
That certainly describes the appointment of Karel Fraeye... I doubt that Roland even realises that fans considered it an affront when he was appointed.
Maybe that's one for the fans forum to ask - do the board and owner realise how insulted fans were that an inexperienced third division manager was parachuted in.
Just when you think you can't despise the current regime any more then you already do, this happens.
That they are even considering bolting on some flats to our home is sickening, the home that so many in the generations of Charlton fans before me fought to save and return our beloved club to.
This is the Valley, the home of Charlton Athletic, simple as that, it is a football stadium, not some multi purpose plot of land for them to add whatever else they wish on, a football stadium that means more to thousands of us Charlton fans then they will ever understand.
We need more details but if they thought they had a fight with us fans before, they have just escalated things tenfold.
Asked a friend who works for DNC about Cahones, and the message back is pretty vicious in its criticism of him, and the surprise he's been allowed near the top of any organisation
And there we have it! Now promoted to a level of incompetence as Chief Operations Officer or similar job title.
I've worked for successful blue chip companies as far as perceived reputation goes, that have been littered with promoting the incompetent, the militant that shout about how everything that they do wrong is someone else's fault, the brown nosers, the people that go on and on about how great their work is when it's the work of their colleagues. They promote these various different types of imbecile up and up the corporate ranks.
At the same time, good people get sick of things and move on to pastures new. How do these companies still function and make profit?
It makes you wonder, eventually they get found out as will this fella when RD's unhappy with the bottom line. KM will receive a little telling off from teacher but she will, no doubt, in true form pass the blame downwards and remove him of his duties just like the succession of team Managers / Coaches. All the more reason to keep the pressure on and hurt RD where it hurts the most.
In our Premier League days there was a proposal to build another tier on the East Stand and build a new Jimmy Seed/South/Open End stand. I think the capacity would have gone up to around 36/37,000. IMO this latest idea shows RD has no intention of ever getting back to the Premier. 1st Division, low wages and overheads and the Masterplan of an academy producing a non stop stream of talented youngsters to be sold for millions. I wonder why other "visionaries" haven't thought of this before.......
we don't need 37000 to be in the PL. I doubt we'd fill such a capacity most weeks anyway
You don't need to fill it most weeks, though, and the reality is that many PL clubs have and are looking to expand their capacity. West Ham, Spurs, Liverpool, Chelsea, all being obvious examples. If The Valley becomes limited to 30k then it will be less attractive to some of the big players interested in buying a football club in London - hence the use of the peninsular stadium as a hook to try to attract them in the past. It may mean that can only happen by leaving The Valley.
I don't think the Belgians have any plan to leave The Valley or convert it all into residential. I don't have the detail of what they are planning here and I don't think they do at this stage, either. But as they discover that the costs of development at the Jimmy Seed end are more than they thought, which I expect is what will happen, they may move further and further towards residential use in order to get a return. They may think, in League One and with gates dwindling, why not just build a walkway across the south end and hand the east stand over to away fans? We can still accommodate 18,000 or so home fans in the north and west. That's all we are going to need. Just as Roger Alwen used to argue that a 15,000 capacity would be enough for Charlton.
I don't know, but I am very sure that I don't trust them to put the long-term interests of the club first.
I'm not sure Spurs, Liverpool and Chelsea are exactly comparable to us in terms of supporter base. Even West Ham are a significantly bigger club than us, they already sell out 35k, and with their taxpayer funded Olympic Stadium are in a perfect place to attract the PL casual watchers
The majority of clubs at "our level" are between 25k and 33k, and the likes of Watford and Swansea around 21k.
Yes, I get that, but I wonder if you asked them what the optimum would be how many would say that their current capacity is ideal. Apart from physical constraints, one of the problems in the past has been the fact those clubs can't rely on staying in the PL.
Apart from a small number of elite clubs, none of us can guarantee which division we'll be in. Long term, we've spent more time in the second tier than any other. Extra capacity is great, but can also kill the atmosphere. MKD have a really nice ground, but their fans rattle around in it. Ewood Park is similarly far too big for Blackburn's current attendances
I recall that in the most recent plans for ground expansion, the second tier on the East Stand was as much about rebuilding the Executive Boxes, and segregating their seating as it was about increasing capacity. Indeed, I'm sure at some point a similar scheme will be revisited as the boxes and corporate facilities on this side are pretty rudimentary when compared with other grounds.
In our Premier League days there was a proposal to build another tier on the East Stand and build a new Jimmy Seed/South/Open End stand. I think the capacity would have gone up to around 36/37,000. IMO this latest idea shows RD has no intention of ever getting back to the Premier. 1st Division, low wages and overheads and the Masterplan of an academy producing a non stop stream of talented youngsters to be sold for millions. I wonder why other "visionaries" haven't thought of this before.......
we don't need 37000 to be in the PL. I doubt we'd fill such a capacity most weeks anyway
You don't need to fill it most weeks, though, and the reality is that many PL clubs have and are looking to expand their capacity. West Ham, Spurs, Liverpool, Chelsea, all being obvious examples. If The Valley becomes limited to 30k then it will be less attractive to some of the big players interested in buying a football club in London - hence the use of the peninsular stadium as a hook to try to attract them in the past. It may mean that can only happen by leaving The Valley.
I don't think the Belgians have any plan to leave The Valley or convert it all into residential. I don't have the detail of what they are planning here and I don't think they do at this stage, either. But as they discover that the costs of development at the Jimmy Seed end are more than they thought, which I expect is what will happen, they may move further and further towards residential use in order to get a return. They may think, in League One and with gates dwindling, why not just build a walkway across the south end and hand the east stand over to away fans? We can still accommodate 18,000 or so home fans in the north and west. That's all we are going to need. Just as Roger Alwen used to argue that a 15,000 capacity would be enough for Charlton.
I don't know, but I am very sure that I don't trust them to put the long-term interests of the club first.
I'm not sure Spurs, Liverpool and Chelsea are exactly comparable to us in terms of supporter base. Even West Ham are a significantly bigger club than us, they already sell out 35k, and with their taxpayer funded Olympic Stadium are in a perfect place to attract the PL casual watchers
The majority of clubs at "our level" are between 25k and 33k, and the likes of Watford and Swansea around 21k.
Yes, I get that, but I wonder if you asked them what the optimum would be how many would say that their current capacity is ideal. Apart from physical constraints, one of the problems in the past has been the fact those clubs can't rely on staying in the PL.
Apart from a small number of elite clubs, none of us can guarantee which division we'll be in. Long term, we've spent more time in the second tier than any other. Extra capacity is great, but can also kill the atmosphere. MKD have a really nice ground, but their fans rattle around in it. Ewood Park is similarly far too big for Blackburn's current attendances
I recall that in the most recent plans for ground expansion, the second tier on the East Stand was as much about rebuilding the Executive Boxes, and segregating their seating as it was about increasing capacity. Indeed, I'm sure at some point a similar scheme will be revisited as the boxes and corporate facilities on this side are pretty rudimentary when compared with other grounds.
Let me make clear I am no fan of this regime. I want RD out. However it is not necessarily a foolish idea to look into this. Any other owner taking over would do the same. Other clubs up and down the country are lookinge rest at ways of developing their grounds to increase the revenue stream.Running a football club is a loss making venture.
The Jimmy Seed stand is in need of modernisation. It lags behind the rest of the ground. My Sheffield Wednesday supporting sons tell me what a poor stand it is.
Who would argue if we got a much improved stand- perhaps of similar capacity or even slightly more, say 4-5,000 and some flats with the stand paid for by the sale of the flats? If, and , it's a big "if" , this were the plan I would not be averse to it. Most thinking supporters would be of a similar view.
In our Premier League days there was a proposal to build another tier on the East Stand and build a new Jimmy Seed/South/Open End stand. I think the capacity would have gone up to around 36/37,000. IMO this latest idea shows RD has no intention of ever getting back to the Premier. 1st Division, low wages and overheads and the Masterplan of an academy producing a non stop stream of talented youngsters to be sold for millions. I wonder why other "visionaries" haven't thought of this before.......
we don't need 37000 to be in the PL. I doubt we'd fill such a capacity most weeks anyway
You don't need to fill it most weeks, though, and the reality is that many PL clubs have and are looking to expand their capacity. West Ham, Spurs, Liverpool, Chelsea, all being obvious examples. If The Valley becomes limited to 30k then it will be less attractive to some of the big players interested in buying a football club in London - hence the use of the peninsular stadium as a hook to try to attract them in the past. It may mean that can only happen by leaving The Valley.
I don't think the Belgians have any plan to leave The Valley or convert it all into residential. I don't have the detail of what they are planning here and I don't think they do at this stage, either. But as they discover that the costs of development at the Jimmy Seed end are more than they thought, which I expect is what will happen, they may move further and further towards residential use in order to get a return. They may think, in League One and with gates dwindling, why not just build a walkway across the south end and hand the east stand over to away fans? We can still accommodate 18,000 or so home fans in the north and west. That's all we are going to need. Just as Roger Alwen used to argue that a 15,000 capacity would be enough for Charlton.
I don't know, but I am very sure that I don't trust them to put the long-term interests of the club first.
I'm not sure Spurs, Liverpool and Chelsea are exactly comparable to us in terms of supporter base. Even West Ham are a significantly bigger club than us, they already sell out 35k, and with their taxpayer funded Olympic Stadium are in a perfect place to attract the PL casual watchers
The majority of clubs at "our level" are between 25k and 33k, and the likes of Watford and Swansea around 21k.
Yes, I get that, but I wonder if you asked them what the optimum would be how many would say that their current capacity is ideal. Apart from physical constraints, one of the problems in the past has been the fact those clubs can't rely on staying in the PL.
Apart from a small number of elite clubs, none of us can guarantee which division we'll be in. Long term, we've spent more time in the second tier than any other. Extra capacity is great, but can also kill the atmosphere. MKD have a really nice ground, but their fans rattle around in it. Ewood Park is similarly far too big for Blackburn's current attendances
I recall that in the most recent plans for ground expansion, the second tier on the East Stand was as much about rebuilding the Executive Boxes, and segregating their seating as it was about increasing capacity. Indeed, I'm sure at some point a similar scheme will be revisited as the boxes and corporate facilities on this side are pretty rudimentary when compared with other grounds.
Reflects the lack of demand, though. Not my area, but the focus was moving much more towards tables in the Centre Circle restaurant than boxes.
I still believe he will sell the football club but retain the Valley and lease it back. The same as Barry Hearn has done at Orient, and what RD has done at St T.
This is by far the biggest risk. It might look good on a financial spreadsheet, but a club has to own its ground. Just look at the recent example at Coventry. There are other examples I'm sure.
In our Premier League days there was a proposal to build another tier on the East Stand and build a new Jimmy Seed/South/Open End stand. I think the capacity would have gone up to around 36/37,000. IMO this latest idea shows RD has no intention of ever getting back to the Premier. 1st Division, low wages and overheads and the Masterplan of an academy producing a non stop stream of talented youngsters to be sold for millions. I wonder why other "visionaries" haven't thought of this before.......
we don't need 37000 to be in the PL. I doubt we'd fill such a capacity most weeks anyway
You don't need to fill it most weeks, though, and the reality is that many PL clubs have and are looking to expand their capacity. West Ham, Spurs, Liverpool, Chelsea, all being obvious examples. If The Valley becomes limited to 30k then it will be less attractive to some of the big players interested in buying a football club in London - hence the use of the peninsular stadium as a hook to try to attract them in the past. It may mean that can only happen by leaving The Valley.
I don't think the Belgians have any plan to leave The Valley or convert it all into residential. I don't have the detail of what they are planning here and I don't think they do at this stage, either. But as they discover that the costs of development at the Jimmy Seed end are more than they thought, which I expect is what will happen, they may move further and further towards residential use in order to get a return. They may think, in League One and with gates dwindling, why not just build a walkway across the south end and hand the east stand over to away fans? We can still accommodate 18,000 or so home fans in the north and west. That's all we are going to need. Just as Roger Alwen used to argue that a 15,000 capacity would be enough for Charlton.
I don't know, but I am very sure that I don't trust them to put the long-term interests of the club first.
I'm not sure Spurs, Liverpool and Chelsea are exactly comparable to us in terms of supporter base. Even West Ham are a significantly bigger club than us, they already sell out 35k, and with their taxpayer funded Olympic Stadium are in a perfect place to attract the PL casual watchers
The majority of clubs at "our level" are between 25k and 33k, and the likes of Watford and Swansea around 21k.
Yes, I get that, but I wonder if you asked them what the optimum would be how many would say that their current capacity is ideal. Apart from physical constraints, one of the problems in the past has been the fact those clubs can't rely on staying in the PL.
Apart from a small number of elite clubs, none of us can guarantee which division we'll be in. Long term, we've spent more time in the second tier than any other. Extra capacity is great, but can also kill the atmosphere. MKD have a really nice ground, but their fans rattle around in it. Ewood Park is similarly far too big for Blackburn's current attendances
I recall that in the most recent plans for ground expansion, the second tier on the East Stand was as much about rebuilding the Executive Boxes, and segregating their seating as it was about increasing capacity. Indeed, I'm sure at some point a similar scheme will be revisited as the boxes and corporate facilities on this side are pretty rudimentary when compared with other grounds.
K&F. Are you for or against Duchatelet.
Against, but I'm not completely against this idea without seeing the details. benno44's comments sums up my comments
he plans a similar development at Jena too. The difference there is that it also involves covering a previously largely open stadium, greatly enhancing the atmosphere.
The really crucial thing, as @MountsfieldPark says, is whether there will be an split of ownership as has happened at STVV. If that is not on the menu, then @benno44 viewpoint above is reasonable. But it is a big if.
That certainly describes the appointment of Karel Fraeye... I doubt that Roland even realises that fans considered it an affront when he was appointed.
Maybe that's one for the fans forum to ask - do the board and owner realise how insulted fans were that an inexperienced third division manager was parachuted in.
I don't want to sidetrack this thread, but Peeters, Luzon and Fraeye are all youngish. Fraeye zero relevant experience, Luzon straight from Israel club and U21s into Standard Liege, Peeters relatively inexperienced - about one year in Jupiler Pro League, iirc. Which leaves Riga as the love-hate John McClane goto figure when the youngsters lead your investment into the brown stuff.
One thing that did always strike me with the old plans for a 40,000 capacity was why the need for a second tier on the East Stand? For such a small tier to go on top of a large stand would look stupid when it's less than half the size of the current stand, would it not be better to knock down the boxes at the top of the East, add more rows to it and keep it to one tier with new boxes built at the back again?
A 40,000 capacity would be ideal if we were able to repeat a sustained run of Premier League football with reduced ticket prices but of course the downside would be a more than half empty ground with relegation to The Championship.
I guess the golden question is how big is big enough? You could argue 27,111 is too big right now but since we returned to The Valley, average gates and the capacity have both increased hand in hand over the years.
I liked the idea of the original plan filling in the SE and SW corners, should that ever happen i'd like to see the Jimmy Seed stand reclaimed as a home end and shove all the away fans into the SW corner.
As for residential flats being built? That for me is a no it just creates too many obstacles and too much red tape should you wish to further expand after they are built. I can understand perhaps building a hotel into the top or back of the stand but no to residential flats.
Talking of delaying tactics, what with planning and avc and political pressure on the council, now that Greenwich is a royal borough can't we find an ancient statute that says those of Flemish descent can't build on royal land till Birnam Wood do come to Dunsinane?
Looks as if somebody in SE7 deserves a toe and a knee in the cojones, not that I'm advocating violence.
Let me make clear I am no fan of this regime. I want RD out. However it is not necessarily a foolish idea to look into this. Any other owner taking over would do the same. Other clubs up and down the country are lookinge rest at ways of developing their grounds to increase the revenue stream.Running a football club is a loss making venture.
The Jimmy Seed stand is in need of modernisation. It lags behind the rest of the ground. My Sheffield Wednesday supporting sons tell me what a poor stand it is.
Who would argue if we got a much improved stand- perhaps of similar capacity or even slightly more, say 4-5,000 and some flats with the stand paid for by the sale of the flats? If, and , it's a big "if" , this were the plan I would not be averse to it. Most thinking supporters would be of a similar view.
So the plans for the residential development include an increase in capacity for the ground overall ?
Let me make clear I am no fan of this regime. I want RD out. However it is not necessarily a foolish idea to look into this. Any other owner taking over would do the same. Other clubs up and down the country are lookinge rest at ways of developing their grounds to increase the revenue stream.Running a football club is a loss making venture.
The Jimmy Seed stand is in need of modernisation. It lags behind the rest of the ground. My Sheffield Wednesday supporting sons tell me what a poor stand it is.
Who would argue if we got a much improved stand- perhaps of similar capacity or even slightly more, say 4-5,000 and some flats with the stand paid for by the sale of the flats? If, and , it's a big "if" , this were the plan I would not be averse to it. Most thinking supporters would be of a similar view.
Well, they'll be able to tell us what they aim to do now, won't they? But I think they will be a long way from understanding the financial viability.
One reason to be extremely cautious is what they have done with ticket offce, which makes no operational sense at all. They have sacrificed a functional facility to separate the ticket windows and the staff accommodation. Even allowing for the desire to promote a channel shift towards the internet this makes no sense and consequently will have to be reversed.
While daft, that isn't a lasting and irreversible mistake. Getting it wrong here could ultimately mean the end of The Valley, whatever the intentions.
Experienced Stadium and venue operator, responsible for managing and developing all aspects of venue services.
Focused on identifying opportunities and maximising returns by understanding what the customer needs, providing clarity & empowerment to management and forming effective confident front line teams to engage customers and provide excellent service experiences. Accomplished at setting up and leading working teams to deliver intricate projects, which include contract openings, mobilisation of new business, property acquisition, planning application and construction programs, organisational development & structural change, new software & system integrations and building refurbishment.
One thing that did always strike me with the old plans for a 40,000 capacity was why the need for a second tier on the East Stand? For such a small tier to go on top of a large stand would look stupid when it's less than half the size of the current stand, would it not be better to knock down the boxes at the top of the East, add more rows to it and keep it to one tier with new boxes built at the back again?
A 40,000 capacity would be ideal if we were able to repeat a sustained run of Premier League football with reduced ticket prices but of course the downside would be a more than half empty ground with relegation to The Championship.
I guess the golden question is how big is big enough? You could argue 27,111 is too big right now but since we returned to The Valley, average gates and the capacity have both increased hand in hand over the years.
I liked the idea of the original plan filling in the SE and SW corners, should that ever happen i'd like to see the Jimmy Seed stand reclaimed as a home end and shove all the away fans into the SW corner.
As for residential flats being built? That for me is a no it just creates too many obstacles and too much red tape. I can understand perhaps building a hotel into the top or back of the stand but no to residential flats.
It's to do with height and creating space in the void at the back, off the top of my head.
Here's a vision for you. A 3rd or 4th tier boutique club with regular attendance of 10 K. An academy which regularly sells product to 1st and 2nd tier clubs or transfers to elsewhere in the network. 20 - 40 flats worth 10 - 30 million in an area close to the river and 20 mins by train into London, 10 mins to Greenwich Park and market, restaurants etc.
Charlton train station is due for upgrade in the same way the Croydon line stations were and property prices outstripped even the London average. Loss by getting related 5-10 million. Profit of downsizing first team operations 10 million minimum plus yearly profit of God knows by selling on youth players.
In this case, our "opinion" will be asked by Greenwich if it gets that far - and there's nothing the Belgians can do to prevent that.
Your faith in LB Greenwich's rigour in consulting on housing developments does you proud but recent history suggests is misplaced. If the identity of the property developer is correct then LBG has proved to be very accommodating (all puns intended) throughout the borough. e.g. "affordable/social housing percentage a problem? Not with us mister developer friend" "massive new development on prime site without consideration of public transport implications? Yes please mister developer, we know your new homeowners won't use buses." "huge new furniture store without consideration of the traffic impact? We're in for business" "new east London river crossing feeding in to already thoroughly over-capacity congested road system of region with seriously sub-standard air quality? We're big fans!" If Roly or Keohane knows which developer to engage then LBG will facilitate with enthusiasm, consultation or no consultation.
In this case, our "opinion" will be asked by Greenwich if it gets that far - and there's nothing the Belgians can do to prevent that.
Your faith in LB Greenwich's rigour in consulting on housing developments does you proud but recent history suggests is misplaced. If the identity of the property developer is correct then LBG has proved to be very accommodating (all puns intended) throughout the borough. e.g. "affordable/social housing percentage a problem? Not with us mister developer friend" "massive new development on prime site without consideration of public transport implications? Yes please mister developer, we know your new homeowners won't use buses." "huge new furniture store without consideration of the traffic impact? We're in for business" "new east London river crossing feeding in to already thoroughly over-capacity congested road system of region with seriously sub-standard air quality? We're big fans!" If Roly or Keohane knows which developer to engage then LBG will facilitate with enthusiasm, consultation or no consultation.
No, my faith is in our ability to frighten the life out of LB Greenwich.
Here's a vision for you. A 3rd or 4th tier boutique club with regular attendance of 10 K. An academy which regularly sells product to 1st and 2nd tier clubs or transfers to elsewhere in the network. 20 - 40 flats worth 10 - 30 million in an area close to the river and 20 mins by train into London, 10 mins to Greenwich Park and market, restaurants etc.
Charlton train station is due for upgrade in the same way the Croydon line stations were and property prices outstripped even the London average. Loss by getting related 5-10 million. Profit of downsizing first team operations 10 million minimum plus yearly profit of God knows by selling on youth players.
Wouldn't be 10 mins to a restaurant with one sitting right underneath the flats
I still want our club to grow, to have aspirations that we can become a bigger club one day but not at the expense of our home the Valley.
Once we let them start building property that has nothing to do with football on or in the Valley site it slowly removes that chance to grow as a club other then us having to move to a new soulless stadium when/if we do get a new owner who has aspirations for the club.
One thing that did always strike me with the old plans for a 40,000 capacity was why the need for a second tier on the East Stand? For such a small tier to go on top of a large stand would look stupid when it's less than half the size of the current stand, would it not be better to knock down the boxes at the top of the East, add more rows to it and keep it to one tier with new boxes built at the back again?
Apart from being quite basic, there were major problems with away fans in the Executive boxes during the PL years. Inevitably, box owners would invite fans from opposing clubs, and their celebrations would cause serious ructions.
By having the boxes behind a small tier of executive seating, this would remove this conflict. Presumably give much better facilities too for the boxes, with their own lounge
Here's a vision for you. A 3rd or 4th tier boutique club with regular attendance of 10 K. An academy which regularly sells product to 1st and 2nd tier clubs or transfers to elsewhere in the network. 20 - 40 flats worth 10 - 30 million in an area close to the river and 20 mins by train into London, 10 mins to Greenwich Park and market, restaurants etc.
Charlton train station is due for upgrade in the same way the Croydon line stations were and property prices outstripped even the London average. Loss by getting related 5-10 million. Profit of downsizing first team operations 10 million minimum plus yearly profit of God knows by selling on youth players.
Wouldn't be 10 mins to a restaurant with one sitting right underneath the flats
That's where all the unsold pies are going. Devilishly cunning.
Here's a vision for you. A 3rd or 4th tier boutique club with regular attendance of 10 K. An academy which regularly sells product to 1st and 2nd tier clubs or transfers to elsewhere in the network. 20 - 40 flats worth 10 - 30 million in an area close to the river and 20 mins by train into London, 10 mins to Greenwich Park and market, restaurants etc.
Charlton train station is due for upgrade in the same way the Croydon line stations were and property prices outstripped even the London average. Loss by getting related 5-10 million. Profit of downsizing first team operations 10 million minimum plus yearly profit of God knows by selling on youth players.
I'm not sure that the production line sale of academy players works well in league one.
Hopefully hypothetical scenario. Gomez or perhaps Lookman worth 2-3 million playing for a Championship club. But half that or less if playing league one. Add to that the financial losses associated with playing third their football and I doubt the plan as you suggest works.
Comments
http://publicaccess.royalgreenwich.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=documents&keyVal=_GRNW_DCAPR_83941
Fight fight fight fight
I think that puts not only the commercial management of the club, but also the choice of head coaches into a true perspective. RD will just cycle through these people until he gets ones that he thinks are good, but his definition of good is different from ours - obviously.
Maybe that's one for the fans forum to ask - do the board and owner realise how insulted fans were that an inexperienced third division manager was parachuted in.
That they are even considering bolting on some flats to our home is sickening, the home that so many in the generations of Charlton fans before me fought to save and return our beloved club to.
This is the Valley, the home of Charlton Athletic, simple as that, it is a football stadium, not some multi purpose plot of land for them to add whatever else they wish on, a football stadium that means more to thousands of us Charlton fans then they will ever understand.
We need more details but if they thought they had a fight with us fans before, they have just escalated things tenfold.
I recall that in the most recent plans for ground expansion, the second tier on the East Stand was as much about rebuilding the Executive Boxes, and segregating their seating as it was about increasing capacity. Indeed, I'm sure at some point a similar scheme will be revisited as the boxes and corporate facilities on this side are pretty rudimentary when compared with other grounds.
The Jimmy Seed stand is in need of modernisation. It lags behind the rest of the ground. My Sheffield Wednesday supporting sons tell me what a poor stand it is.
Who would argue if we got a much improved stand- perhaps of similar capacity or even slightly more, say 4-5,000 and some flats with the stand paid for by the sale of the flats? If, and , it's a big "if" , this were the plan I would not be averse to it. Most thinking supporters would be of a similar view.
The really crucial thing, as @MountsfieldPark says, is whether there will be an split of ownership as has happened at STVV. If that is not on the menu, then @benno44 viewpoint above is reasonable. But it is a big if.
A 40,000 capacity would be ideal if we were able to repeat a sustained run of Premier League football with reduced ticket prices but of course the downside would be a more than half empty ground with relegation to The Championship.
I guess the golden question is how big is big enough? You could argue 27,111 is too big right now but since we returned to The Valley, average gates and the capacity have both increased hand in hand over the years.
I liked the idea of the original plan filling in the SE and SW corners, should that ever happen i'd like to see the Jimmy Seed stand reclaimed as a home end and shove all the away fans into the SW corner.
As for residential flats being built? That for me is a no it just creates too many obstacles and too much red tape should you wish to further expand after they are built. I can understand perhaps building a hotel into the top or back of the stand but no to residential flats.
Looks as if somebody in SE7 deserves a toe and a knee in the cojones, not that I'm advocating violence.
One reason to be extremely cautious is what they have done with ticket offce, which makes no operational sense at all. They have sacrificed a functional facility to separate the ticket windows and the staff accommodation. Even allowing for the desire to promote a channel shift towards the internet this makes no sense and consequently will have to be reversed.
While daft, that isn't a lasting and irreversible mistake. Getting it wrong here could ultimately mean the end of The Valley, whatever the intentions.
In a game of wank-word bingo.
A 3rd or 4th tier boutique club with regular attendance of 10 K.
An academy which regularly sells product to 1st and 2nd tier clubs or transfers to elsewhere in the network.
20 - 40 flats worth 10 - 30 million in an area close to the river and 20 mins by train into London, 10 mins to Greenwich Park and market, restaurants etc.
Charlton train station is due for upgrade in the same way the Croydon line stations were and property prices outstripped even the London average. Loss by getting related 5-10 million. Profit of downsizing first team operations 10 million minimum plus yearly profit of God knows by selling on youth players.
If Roly or Keohane knows which developer to engage then LBG will facilitate with enthusiasm, consultation or no consultation.
Once we let them start building property that has nothing to do with football on or in the Valley site it slowly removes that chance to grow as a club other then us having to move to a new soulless stadium when/if we do get a new owner who has aspirations for the club.
That is my fear from this news.
By having the boxes behind a small tier of executive seating, this would remove this conflict. Presumably give much better facilities too for the boxes, with their own lounge
Hopefully hypothetical scenario. Gomez or perhaps Lookman worth 2-3 million playing for a Championship club. But half that or less if playing league one. Add to that the financial losses associated with playing third their football and I doubt the plan as you suggest works.