205 new posts, great I thought, maybe a take over is actually 'imminent' for once. No, unfortunately not, it's Donald Trump have a complete and utter meltdown, at least he changed platforms this time, must be on a Twitter ban.
Supporters and numbers that’s my game ! We’d have to be knocking on the champions league door every season forever to sustain crowds above 30k imo We just don’t have it , the floaters will float in initially and float back out as it all becomes a bit boring and samey to those not dyed in the wool . Our home numbers dwindled towards the last few seasons of Prem football yes it wasn’t the most riveting . I believe no matter how successful we are and I’m up for someone coming in and buying Messi , Ronaldo , Kermorgant installing SCP etc and winning the Prem , Champions League etc and we’d only need a decent facelift of The Valley to get the capacity up a few thousand . 40k would not be needed unless we wanted 10k of away fans to fill up the ground . More importantly would this lead to a consistent decent away following , probably not .
Supporters and numbers that’s my game ! We’d have to be knocking on the champions league door every season forever to sustain crowds above 30k imo We just don’t have it , the floaters will float in initially and float back out as it all becomes a bit boring and samey to those not dyed in the wool . Our home numbers dwindled towards the last few seasons of Prem football yes it wasn’t the most riveting . I believe no matter how successful we are and I’m up for someone coming in and buying Messi , Ronaldo , Kermorgant installing SCP etc and winning the Prem , Champions League etc and we’d only need a decent facelift of The Valley to get the capacity up a few thousand . 40k would not be needed unless we wanted 10k of away fans to fill up the ground . More importantly would this lead to a consistent decent away following , probably not .
This is 100% it. We couldn't fill the valley 100% everywhere when football was in its boom time for spectators. Lot of people missed out but unless it was arsenal, man utd, Chelsea at home we didn't sell out.
And too add the ST were so cheap which was great but you had fans of other clubs then just buying one to guarantee a seat to watch their side for whenever that fixture was.
27000 13000 Charlton fans ST holders 10000 Football fans ST holders
The rest filled with away fans to make up the capacity.
I can add up as well but I'd say there was away fans in the home areas to bring it up to 27k
Supporters and numbers that’s my game ! We’d have to be knocking on the champions league door every season forever to sustain crowds above 30k imo We just don’t have it , the floaters will float in initially and float back out as it all becomes a bit boring and samey to those not dyed in the wool . Our home numbers dwindled towards the last few seasons of Prem football yes it wasn’t the most riveting . I believe no matter how successful we are and I’m up for someone coming in and buying Messi , Ronaldo , Kermorgant installing SCP etc and winning the Prem , Champions League etc and we’d only need a decent facelift of The Valley to get the capacity up a few thousand . 40k would not be needed unless we wanted 10k of away fans to fill up the ground . More importantly would this lead to a consistent decent away following , probably not .
This is where you have it all wrong oohaah.
The increase in Leipzig gates shows that we WILL have 100k fans applying for our home games.
To be fair @The_President does raise some valid arguments about the Club moving away from the Valley.
But at the moment it's pointless until we get ambitious and wealthy enough owners to drive the Club forward, with sustained investment in the both the playing squad and Club infra structure.
Get us promoted, finish Sparrows Lane, get us promoted again, fill The Valley up week in week out, regardless of the opposition, challenge for silverware, actually have a waiting list for S/T holders, then we can review whether or not further investment in The Valley is worthwhile or we need to move the Club to a nice shiny state of the art 50k capacity stadium, somewhere within 20 miles of The Valley - and South of the River.
I think a lot of us will be long gone by then to be honest.
To be fair @The_President does raise some valid arguments about the Club moving away from the Valley.
But at the moment it's pointless until we get ambitious and wealthy enough owners to drive the Club forward, with sustained investment in the both the playing squad and Club infra structure.
Get us promoted, finish Sparrows Lane, get us promoted again, fill The Valley up week in week out, regardless of the opposition, challenge for silverware, actually have a waiting list for S/T holders, then we can review whether or not further investment in The Valley is worthwhile or we need to move the Club to a nice shiny state of the art 50k capacity stadium, somewhere within 20 miles of The Valley - and South of the River.
I think a lot of us will be long gone by then to be honest.
Hopefully The President will digest and agree with the opening part of paragraph three and come back to us if it happens.
He also likes to have the last word, a terrible trait.
I'm not ITK nor do I know anyone who is ITK. I don't think its RB as a few posters are adamant that its not, but just wanted to see why some fans have an aversion to changing th name of the Stadium and / or moving grounds. In the Premiership we have the Liberty Stadium, The Emirates & Sports Direct and 2 of those teams have also recently moved to brand new grounds & I don't see their fans moaning & saying " I wish we didn't have rich owners & were back in the 3rd tier of football so we could enjoy our ground being called the Vetch field"
If we do happen to get taken over by a very large conglomerate, get out of this crappy league & move 1 mile down the road to a 40,000 seater stadium I wont complain. You don't have to come along - you can spend you hard earned money at Welling, Dartford or Bromley.
Strange comment.
I believe you have been going long enough to know the importance of staying at The Valley.
I realise neither option is necessarily inevitable but I’d rather leave The Valley if it means CAFC can thrive and prosper for the next 100 years than remain where we fester and die.
To be fair @The_President does raise some valid arguments about the Club moving away from the Valley.
As a Luddite dinosaur, I don’t think he does in any way shape or form. Clubs move grounds primarily for two reasons 1. they have outgrown over a consistent period their existing one or 2. their old ground has fallen into such disrepair or in need of modernisation that it would cost too much money to address without further benefits.
Quite simply The Valley IS Charlton Athletic.
In our history of bland, non-achievement the successful fight the supporters went through to secure its return is the one shining light that provides our identity and makes us stand out as a club. It is adequately modernised and sustainable for the next 20 years at least, and currently we are only a third filling it.
Even after a period of relative success we can see how flakey our newly gained support was ten years down the line. We are not West Ham with a 250k plus historic support base to tap into and we cannot currently sell more than 4 executive boxes.
Pres said he would happily up sticks, move ground, change our name, our badge and our colours etc if it looked like delivering more football success. He’s probably not alone in that, but that to me is Wimbledon / MK Dons and i have to question why anyone is so uncomfortable or wishing to change what is fundamentally our own skin, our identity, and as someone raised yesterday, why you have been seeking to drive and lead protests when the heart of those protests is very much based on the threat and disregard to the club’s identity. With the greatest respect, I just don’t get it.
This club still it has its base and core at heart and needs rebuilding, and I’m sure it will with realism that there is probably a ceiling to potential achievement over the medium term.
What it doesn’t need is ground moves for non-football reasons, and it never ever ever needs to change its name.
And if that makes me a Luddite dinosaur then I’m very proud to be one.
To be fair @The_President does raise some valid arguments about the Club moving away from the Valley.
As a Luddite dinosaur, I don’t think he does in any way shape or form. Clubs move grounds primarily for two reasons 1. they have outgrown over a consistent period their existing one or 2. their old ground has fallen into such disrepair or in need of modernisation that it would cost too much money to address without further benefits.
Quite simply The Valley IS Charlton Athletic.
In our history of bland, non-achievement the successful fight the supporters went through to secure its return is the one shining light that provides our identity and makes us stand out as a club. It is adequately modernised and sustainable for the next 20 years at least, and currently we are only a third filling it.
Even after a period of relative success we can see how flakey our newly gained support was ten years down the line. We are not West Ham with a 250k plus historic support base to tap into and we cannot currently sell more than 4 executive boxes.
Pres said he would happily up sticks, move ground, change our name, our badge and our colours etc if it looked like delivering more football success. He’s probably not alone in that, but that to me is Wimbledon / MK Dons and i have to question why anyone is so uncomfortable or wishing to change what is fundamentally our own skin, our identity, and as someone raised yesterday, why you have been seeking to drive and lead protests when the heart of those protests is very much based on the threat and disregard to the club’s identity. With the greatest respect, I just don’t get it.
This club still it has its base and core at heart and needs rebuilding, and I’m sure it will with realism that there is probably a ceiling to potential achievement over the medium term.
What it doesn’t need is ground moves for non-football reasons, and it never ever ever needs to change its name.
And if that makes me a Luddite dinosaur then I’m very proud to be one.
Got that off my chest :-)
Can't argue with any of that.
However, I felt the point that @The_President was making if that we want to successfully compete at the very highest level of football then it's unlikely that The Valley would be able to support that without massive re-development and the subsequent investment in local infra structure to support 40K fans turning up three times a month.
Thankfully, the likes of Red Bull won't be our new owners and therefore the whole argument is hypothetical.
To be fair @The_President does raise some valid arguments about the Club moving away from the Valley.
As a Luddite dinosaur, I don’t think he does in any way shape or form. Clubs move grounds primarily for two reasons 1. they have outgrown over a consistent period their existing one or 2. their old ground has fallen into such disrepair or in need of modernisation that it would cost too much money to address without further benefits.
Quite simply The Valley IS Charlton Athletic.
In our history of bland, non-achievement the successful fight the supporters went through to secure its return is the one shining light that provides our identity and makes us stand out as a club. It is adequately modernised and sustainable for the next 20 years at least, and currently we are only a third filling it.
Even after a period of relative success we can see how flakey our newly gained support was ten years down the line. We are not West Ham with a 250k plus historic support base to tap into and we cannot currently sell more than 4 executive boxes.
Pres said he would happily up sticks, move ground, change our name, our badge and our colours etc if it looked like delivering more football success. He’s probably not alone in that, but that to me is Wimbledon / MK Dons and i have to question why anyone is so uncomfortable or wishing to change what is fundamentally our own skin, our identity, and as someone raised yesterday, why you have been seeking to drive and lead protests when the heart of those protests is very much based on the threat and disregard to the club’s identity. With the greatest respect, I just don’t get it.
This club still it has its base and core at heart and needs rebuilding, and I’m sure it will with realism that there is probably a ceiling to potential achievement over the medium term.
What it doesn’t need is ground moves for non-football reasons, and it never ever ever needs to change its name.
And if that makes me a Luddite dinosaur then I’m very proud to be one.
To be fair @The_President does raise some valid arguments about the Club moving away from the Valley.
As a Luddite dinosaur, I don’t think he does in any way shape or form. Clubs move grounds primarily for two reasons 1. they have outgrown over a consistent period their existing one or 2. their old ground has fallen into such disrepair or in need of modernisation that it would cost too much money to address without further benefits.
Quite simply The Valley IS Charlton Athletic.
In our history of bland, non-achievement the successful fight the supporters went through to secure its return is the one shining light that provides our identity and makes us stand out as a club. It is adequately modernised and sustainable for the next 20 years at least, and currently we are only a third filling it.
Even after a period of relative success we can see how flakey our newly gained support was ten years down the line. We are not West Ham with a 250k plus historic support base to tap into and we cannot currently sell more than 4 executive boxes.
Pres said he would happily up sticks, move ground, change our name, our badge and our colours etc if it looked like delivering more football success. He’s probably not alone in that, but that to me is Wimbledon / MK Dons and i have to question why anyone is so uncomfortable or wishing to change what is fundamentally our own skin, our identity, and as someone raised yesterday, why you have been seeking to drive and lead protests when the heart of those protests is very much based on the threat and disregard to the club’s identity. With the greatest respect, I just don’t get it.
This club still it has its base and core at heart and needs rebuilding, and I’m sure it will with realism that there is probably a ceiling to potential achievement over the medium term.
What it doesn’t need is ground moves for non-football reasons, and it never ever ever needs to change its name.
And if that makes me a Luddite dinosaur then I’m very proud to be one.
Got that off my chest :-)
Me too! I'd rather they spent the half a billion pounds or whatever it cost taking the Valley up to 40k and producing a team to stay in the top flight and maybe, one day, challenge for silverware. We must not leave the Valley, ever.
To be fair @The_President does raise some valid arguments about the Club moving away from the Valley.
As a Luddite dinosaur, I don’t think he does in any way shape or form. Clubs move grounds primarily for two reasons 1. they have outgrown over a consistent period their existing one or 2. their old ground has fallen into such disrepair or in need of modernisation that it would cost too much money to address without further benefits.
Quite simply The Valley IS Charlton Athletic.
In our history of bland, non-achievement the successful fight the supporters went through to secure its return is the one shining light that provides our identity and makes us stand out as a club. It is adequately modernised and sustainable for the next 20 years at least, and currently we are only a third filling it.
Even after a period of relative success we can see how flakey our newly gained support was ten years down the line. We are not West Ham with a 250k plus historic support base to tap into and we cannot currently sell more than 4 executive boxes.
Pres said he would happily up sticks, move ground, change our name, our badge and our colours etc if it looked like delivering more football success. He’s probably not alone in that, but that to me is Wimbledon / MK Dons and i have to question why anyone is so uncomfortable or wishing to change what is fundamentally our own skin, our identity, and as someone raised yesterday, why you have been seeking to drive and lead protests when the heart of those protests is very much based on the threat and disregard to the club’s identity. With the greatest respect, I just don’t get it.
This club still it has its base and core at heart and needs rebuilding, and I’m sure it will with realism that there is probably a ceiling to potential achievement over the medium term.
What it doesn’t need is ground moves for non-football reasons, and it never ever ever needs to change its name.
And if that makes me a Luddite dinosaur then I’m very proud to be one.
Got that off my chest :-)
Can't argue with any of that.
However, I felt the point that @The_President was making if that we want to successfully compete at the very highest level of football then it's unlikely that The Valley would be able to support that without massive re-development and the subsequent investment in local infra structure to support 40K fans turning up three times a month.
Thankfully, the likes of Red Bull won't be our new owners and therefore the whole argument is hypothetical.
Massive redevelopment and investment in local infrastructure is also required at Morden Wharf. The spivs identified a timescale of eight or nine years in 2012-13 (in part because of planning and land ownership issues) in a process that hasn’t even started - nobody is moving to the peninsula in the foreseeable future, whether a move has any merits or not.
The spiv ownership collapsed in part because it was not clear that a peninsula scheme with a stadium could ever be delivered. Hard nosed major investors looked at it and walked away because they were not persuaded it could be stacked up.
I think the key thing here is that for some people football is all about results and success. There is nothing wrong with that I'm not gonna tell anyone how to support their club. However, for many others it's about so much more. We have had comments about Rolands tenure that it "just doesn't feel like charlton" and that feeling is an all important ingredient for people. It's about identity and engagement and belonging.
What pres doesnt seem to get is that these people want success just as much they just want it achieved differently, without the loss of all that makes them what they are.
To be fair @The_President does raise some valid arguments about the Club moving away from the Valley.
As a Luddite dinosaur, I don’t think he does in any way shape or form. Clubs move grounds primarily for two reasons 1. they have outgrown over a consistent period their existing one or 2. their old ground has fallen into such disrepair or in need of modernisation that it would cost too much money to address without further benefits.
Quite simply The Valley IS Charlton Athletic.
In our history of bland, non-achievement the successful fight the supporters went through to secure its return is the one shining light that provides our identity and makes us stand out as a club. It is adequately modernised and sustainable for the next 20 years at least, and currently we are only a third filling it.
Even after a period of relative success we can see how flakey our newly gained support was ten years down the line. We are not West Ham with a 250k plus historic support base to tap into and we cannot currently sell more than 4 executive boxes.
Pres said he would happily up sticks, move ground, change our name, our badge and our colours etc if it looked like delivering more football success. He’s probably not alone in that, but that to me is Wimbledon / MK Dons and i have to question why anyone is so uncomfortable or wishing to change what is fundamentally our own skin, our identity, and as someone raised yesterday, why you have been seeking to drive and lead protests when the heart of those protests is very much based on the threat and disregard to the club’s identity. With the greatest respect, I just don’t get it.
This club still it has its base and core at heart and needs rebuilding, and I’m sure it will with realism that there is probably a ceiling to potential achievement over the medium term.
What it doesn’t need is ground moves for non-football reasons, and it never ever ever needs to change its name.
And if that makes me a Luddite dinosaur then I’m very proud to be one.
Got that off my chest :-)
Can't argue with any of that.
However, I felt the point that @The_President was making if that we want to successfully compete at the very highest level of football then it's unlikely that The Valley would be able to support that without massive re-development and the subsequent investment in local infra structure to support 40K fans turning up three times a month.
Thankfully, the likes of Red Bull won't be our new owners and therefore the whole argument is hypothetical.
Massive redevelopment and investment in local infrastructure is also required at Morden Wharf. The spivs identified a timescale of eight or nine years in 2012-13 (in part because of planning and land ownership issues) in a process that hasn’t even started - nobody is moving to the peninsula in the foreseeable future, whether a move has any merits or not.
The spiv ownership collapsed in part because it was not clear that a peninsula scheme with a stadium could ever be delivered. Hard nosed major investors looked at it and walked away because they were not persuaded it could be stacked up.
I'm sure there are more sites that are viable rather than just the peninsula though.
To be fair @The_President does raise some valid arguments about the Club moving away from the Valley.
As a Luddite dinosaur, I don’t think he does in any way shape or form. Clubs move grounds primarily for two reasons 1. they have outgrown over a consistent period their existing one or 2. their old ground has fallen into such disrepair or in need of modernisation that it would cost too much money to address without further benefits.
Quite simply The Valley IS Charlton Athletic.
In our history of bland, non-achievement the successful fight the supporters went through to secure its return is the one shining light that provides our identity and makes us stand out as a club. It is adequately modernised and sustainable for the next 20 years at least, and currently we are only a third filling it.
Even after a period of relative success we can see how flakey our newly gained support was ten years down the line. We are not West Ham with a 250k plus historic support base to tap into and we cannot currently sell more than 4 executive boxes.
Pres said he would happily up sticks, move ground, change our name, our badge and our colours etc if it looked like delivering more football success. He’s probably not alone in that, but that to me is Wimbledon / MK Dons and i have to question why anyone is so uncomfortable or wishing to change what is fundamentally our own skin, our identity, and as someone raised yesterday, why you have been seeking to drive and lead protests when the heart of those protests is very much based on the threat and disregard to the club’s identity. With the greatest respect, I just don’t get it.
This club still it has its base and core at heart and needs rebuilding, and I’m sure it will with realism that there is probably a ceiling to potential achievement over the medium term.
What it doesn’t need is ground moves for non-football reasons, and it never ever ever needs to change its name.
And if that makes me a Luddite dinosaur then I’m very proud to be one.
Got that off my chest :-)
Can't argue with any of that.
However, I felt the point that @The_President was making if that we want to successfully compete at the very highest level of football then it's unlikely that The Valley would be able to support that without massive re-development and the subsequent investment in local infra structure to support 40K fans turning up three times a month.
Thankfully, the likes of Red Bull won't be our new owners and therefore the whole argument is hypothetical.
Massive redevelopment and investment in local infrastructure is also required at Morden Wharf. The spivs identified a timescale of eight or nine years in 2012-13 (in part because of planning and land ownership issues) in a process that hasn’t even started - nobody is moving to the peninsula in the foreseeable future, whether a move has any merits or not.
The spiv ownership collapsed in part because it was not clear that a peninsula scheme with a stadium could ever be delivered. Hard nosed major investors looked at it and walked away because they were not persuaded it could be stacked up.
I'm sure there are more sites that are viable rather than just the peninsula though.
Yes, we could move into Wembley, become RB London and have big crowds and trophies.
That would be OK for the President.
It wouldn't be ok for me.
There just isn't a business case for moving to a new stadium in SE London now or in the near future.
The resale value of the valley land wouldn't cover the costs of a new ground and the increased income potential could more easily be achieved by rebuilding the Valley.
I'm not saying we can never leave but the new has to be a significant benefit above the current to make it viable or justifiable.
More importantly, it just ain't happening.
Let's cross that bridge when and if we ever get to it.
Comments
As this discussion has touched on everything bar nuclear physics and needlework I see no reason to exclude the good old trams.
So - one more video (no more, I promise), but this is real hard-core ....
We’d have to be knocking on the champions league door every season forever to sustain crowds above 30k imo
We just don’t have it , the floaters will float in initially and float back out as it all becomes a bit boring and samey to those not dyed in the wool .
Our home numbers dwindled towards the last few seasons of Prem football yes it wasn’t the most riveting .
I believe no matter how successful we are and I’m up for someone coming in and buying Messi , Ronaldo , Kermorgant installing SCP etc and winning the Prem , Champions League etc and we’d only need a decent facelift of The Valley to get the capacity up a few thousand .
40k would not be needed unless we wanted 10k of away fans to fill up the ground .
More importantly would this lead to a consistent decent away following , probably not .
We couldn't fill the valley 100% everywhere when football was in its boom time for spectators.
Lot of people missed out but unless it was arsenal, man utd, Chelsea at home we didn't sell out.
27000
13000 Charlton fans ST holders
10000 Football fans ST holders
The rest filled with away fans to make up the capacity.
I can add up as well but I'd say there was away fans in the home areas to bring it up to 27k
The increase in Leipzig gates shows that we WILL have 100k fans applying for our home games.
But at the moment it's pointless until we get ambitious and wealthy enough owners to drive the Club forward, with sustained investment in the both the playing squad and Club infra structure.
Get us promoted, finish Sparrows Lane, get us promoted again, fill The Valley up week in week out, regardless of the opposition, challenge for silverware, actually have a waiting list for S/T holders, then we can review whether or not further investment in The Valley is worthwhile or we need to move the Club to a nice shiny state of the art 50k capacity stadium, somewhere within 20 miles of The Valley - and South of the River.
I think a lot of us will be long gone by then to be honest.
He also likes to have the last word, a terrible trait.
Quite simply The Valley IS Charlton Athletic.
In our history of bland, non-achievement the successful fight the supporters went through to secure its return is the one shining light that provides our identity and makes us stand out as a club. It is adequately modernised and sustainable for the next 20 years at least, and currently we are only a third filling it.
Even after a period of relative success we can see how flakey our newly gained support was ten years down the line. We are not West Ham with a 250k plus historic support base to tap into and we cannot currently sell more than 4 executive boxes.
Pres said he would happily up sticks, move ground, change our name, our badge and our colours etc if it looked like delivering more football success. He’s probably not alone in that, but that to me is Wimbledon / MK Dons and i have to question why anyone is so uncomfortable or wishing to change what is fundamentally our own skin, our identity, and as someone raised yesterday, why you have been seeking to drive and lead protests when the heart of those protests is very much based on the threat and disregard to the club’s identity. With the greatest respect, I just don’t get it.
This club still it has its base and core at heart and needs rebuilding, and I’m sure it will with realism that there is probably a ceiling to potential achievement over the medium term.
What it doesn’t need is ground moves for non-football reasons, and it never ever ever needs to change its name.
And if that makes me a Luddite dinosaur then I’m very proud to be one.
Got that off my chest :-)
However, I felt the point that @The_President was making if that we want to successfully compete at the very highest level of football then it's unlikely that The Valley would be able to support that without massive re-development and the subsequent investment in local infra structure to support 40K fans turning up three times a month.
Thankfully, the likes of Red Bull won't be our new owners and therefore the whole argument is hypothetical.
Please
We must not leave the Valley, ever.
The spiv ownership collapsed in part because it was not clear that a peninsula scheme with a stadium could ever be delivered. Hard nosed major investors looked at it and walked away because they were not persuaded it could be stacked up.
What pres doesnt seem to get is that these people want success just as much they just want it achieved differently, without the loss of all that makes them what they are.
That would be OK for the President.
It wouldn't be ok for me.
There just isn't a business case for moving to a new stadium in SE London now or in the near future.
The resale value of the valley land wouldn't cover the costs of a new ground and the increased income potential could more easily be achieved by rebuilding the Valley.
I'm not saying we can never leave but the new has to be a significant benefit above the current to make it viable or justifiable.
More importantly, it just ain't happening.
Let's cross that bridge when and if we ever get to it.
We haven't even got rid of Duchatelet yet.
Keep your eye on the prize.