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.
We haven't even got rid of Duchatelet yet.
Keep your eye on the prize.
Where has Wembley come from ?? Has it recently moved to South-East London ??
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.
We haven't even got rid of Duchatelet yet.
Keep your eye on the prize.
Where has Wembley come from ?? Has it recently moved to South-East London ??
Typical luddite lil ol charlton fan, has to stay in SE London so turns down progress.
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.
We haven't even got rid of Duchatelet yet.
Keep your eye on the prize.
Where has Wembley come from ?? Has it recently moved to South-East London ??
Typical luddite lil ol charlton fan, has to stay in SE London so turns down progress.
I agree - and speaking selfishly Wembley would be easier for me to get to for home games.
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.
We haven't even got rid of Duchatelet yet.
Keep your eye on the prize.
Where has Wembley come from ?? Has it recently moved to South-East London ??
Typical luddite lil ol charlton fan, has to stay in SE London so turns down progress.
I agree - and speaking selfishly Wembley would be easier for me to get to for home games.
See, boosting gates already. We'd soon have lots of northern fans but stuck in the mud fans like the president won't move with the times.
This time without the snide sycophantic posts - and just talk about the facts?
Oh , alright then, trams it is - GHF where are you?
I'm not sure I can offer much on trams at the moment - I'm still reeling from a spectacular derailment this afternoon. (Would Leipzig trams be allowed, btw?) If you really want a time out with a public transport theme, how about the much-overlooked Woolwich Ferry, in the 50s the East London river crossing of choice for a future England football captain. The present-day ferries date from 1964, but are finally due for replacement later this year. With Crossrail threatening delays and/or cost overruns the dear old Ferry could be the big Woolwich transport success story of 2018.
Its all a bit (very) childish tbh, then again no more than I would have expected.
You cant win the argument by facts therefore resort to childish ridicule.
No, I just won the debate by turning your arguments back on you in order to show how ridiculous they are.
It's not childish, it's the art of debate but you wont understand that either.
'Won' - is this a competition?
You are aware that you used the word 'win' first, in the very post that Henry quoted?
Just like you indulged in name calling before complaining about other people's childish comments?
I honestly can't decide whether this has all been a massive wind up, or just an astonishing lack of self awareness. I'm leaning towards the former.
But unfortunately I suspect it's the latter.
Mr President, you're entitled to want to move the club to the peninsular, but you don't need to throw your toys out of the pram when other disagree. It's called a difference of opinion.
Just to clarify, I saw Varney at half time as he and the people he was with waited a bit before going down so were clear to see, didn’t even think to take a picture myself. I’m 99% sure it was him and I’d be surprised if there were no pictures of him.
Comments
Has it recently moved to South-East London ??
Fuckin addicks
Wem-ber-lee
I expected 200 comments after that and ignored it as nothing else said.
Obsequious United 20 The Presidents (X)I 0.
Its all a bit (very) childish tbh, then again no more than I would have expected.
You cant win the argument by facts therefore resort to childish ridicule.
It's not childish, it's the art of debate but you wont understand that either.
Maybe go and find a mirror or something.
Enjoy Wembley
This time without the snide sycophantic posts - and just talk about the facts?
Oh , alright then, trams it is - GHF where are you?
Just like you indulged in name calling before complaining about other people's childish comments?
I honestly can't decide whether this has all been a massive wind up, or just an astonishing lack of self awareness. I'm leaning towards the former.
Mr President, you're entitled to want to move the club to the peninsular, but you don't need to throw your toys out of the pram when other disagree. It's called a difference of opinion.
But as for the trams....