New ground

[dsr]

Quite apart from the OP's weird idea that we need to build a new stand to improve the catering ...

I strongly dislike this modern trend people have to assume that they are right and no-one who disagrees can possibly have a rational reason. People don't have to be "scared" to build a new ground. They may just like the current one.

[MT03ALG]

A new ground out of town would extend the Town to Turf planning and would take light years !!

[Quickenthetempo]

The modern day owner doesn’t care about fans feelings I’m afraid it’s a money making business. If they could they’d build a new stadium heavily designed for corporate occasions and maximum profit . Brentford, Brighton , Everton , have all done it

Oh I agree, it's just not aimed at me.

Is the club big enough to go down that route? Not sure?
It's the first season we have had maximum sell outs, but all tickets on the exchange aren't getting sold.

[Goliath]

I’d love to see them buy out the cricket club, they can build a ground on Towneley it is big enough. Build a new 2 or 3 tier stand with car parking or retail outlets behind it.
A new stadium is way out of our league and as has happened at every other club would set the side back years.

The traffic in Towneleys bad enough as it is and people are in the process of trying to get the council to do somethimg about it. A sports ground is the last thing it needs.

[Vegas Claret]

NEWTURF.jpeg

as if the sun is out

[Goody1975]

We had the chance to put things in place in 1995 for the long term plan for Turf Moor.

Yes we didn't have a lot of cash and relied heavily on money from the football foundation but what we got was substandard. Nobody can question the hard work put in by people behind the scenes but feel they didn't have the foresight to see what they wanted and to put it in place with the budget they had, even raising the front rows up to a similar height of the older stands would have been a start, there are so many poor views on the Longside lower and the poor concourses in the upper tiers are things that could and should have been thought through at the design and implementation stage.

Moving the Longside back a few yards to future proof any possible rebuild of the Bob Lord Stand, giving it the larger footprint to make it a worthwhile rebuild. The gym could have moved to create the space for that.

Remember the Britannia Stadium cost under £15 Million to build and the Stadium of Light was about £16 Million for the first phase with another £7 for the new tier a few years later. Yes, our two stands cost just over £5 Million but in terms of value for money, did we get a good deal in comparison.

[Taffy on the wing]

Maybe they could hire the same crew that's doing the culvert work.

[Mark the Claret]

We had the chance to put things in place in 1995 for the long term plan for Turf Moor.

Yes we didn't have a lot of cash and relied heavily on money from the football foundation but what we got was substandard. Nobody can question the hard work put in by people behind the scenes but feel they didn't have the foresight to see what they wanted and to put it in place with the budget they had, even raising the front rows up to a similar height of the older stands would have been a start, there are so many poor views on the Longside lower and the poor concourses in the upper tiers are things that could and should have been thought through at the design and implementation stage.

Moving the Longside back a few yards to future proof any possible rebuild of the Bob Lord Stand, giving it the larger footprint to make it a worthwhile rebuild. The gym could have moved to create the space for that.

Remember the Britannia Stadium cost under £15 Million to build and the Stadium of Light was about £16 Million for the first phase with another £7 for the new tier a few years later. Yes, our two stands cost just over £5 Million but in terms of value for money, did we get a good deal in comparison.

The Britannia stadium is awful, I bet the fans wish they had stayed in the Victoria Ground, miles better atmosphere.

[Goody1975]

The Britannia stadium is awful, I bet the fans wish they had stayed in the Victoria Ground, miles better atmosphere.

I'm not disputing that, the Victoria Ground was special, it's in terms of the quality of the finish and long term planning.

The main stand at Stoke is in a really weird position in comparison to the other three.

[thomaspaine]

Not for me . There isn’t a great deal wrong with the ground the way it is .There are worse grounds in the Premiership that’s for sure . Granted a new Cricket Field Stand would be an improvement and that should be the next objective but moving from our historic home , certainly not .

[boyyanno]

The stadium is functional as it is in my opinion. It needs renovating yes, but I don't know what's so bad about the rest of it really? It always makes me feel weird when some people say they don't like getting wet. It's an outdoor sport ffs.

The catering could be improved without doing anything to the stands, at worst the Cricket Field stand could be updated but is it worth it? Will it improve the product on offer? Not really.

Non starter for me.

[NewClaret]

This is nothing against Turf Moor, I love it and my view, but it’s not a Premier League ground in a million years. Most Championship teams have a better stadium than us.

I can’t see it being a priority any time soon but I would focus initially on improving what we have - modernising/brightening the concourses, doing something drastic with the catering, etc.

Then I’d reclad the Jimmy Mac & Longside to replace the old corrugated sides with some modern new panelling, perhaps with perforations and some light coming through them for night games, etc. Imagine that could all be done pretty cheaply.

Then I’d knock down the CFS and wrap the longside around (moving the pitch as far towards the Longside and Jimmy Mac as possible to create the room & buying some land from the CC if necessary).

A new tunnel from the quadrant and I’d possibly move the dug outs to the longside in the process. Sorry longside lowers

The Bob Lord needs sorting at some point but I’d probably leave that as is.

[Mark the Claret]

The main problem with the CFS is under the stand, it's not fit for purpose at halftime, and I am amazed it passes any health and safety standards.

[gandhisflipflop]

The main problem with the CFS is under the stand, it's not fit for purpose at halftime, and I am amazed it passes any health and safety standards.

It’s the main reason I came out of that stand. It’s an accident waiting to happen.

[Boss Hogg]

Not needed. We’d lose more than we gained.

[mikeS]

Nice artists impression but where's the Culvert and the Miners. ?

[Devils_Advocate]

A new ground out towards Hapton and Huncoat off the A56 somewhere would be amazing but I can't see it happening anytime soon.

If it does happen I think it will more than likely be funded and driven from the rise of Burnley FC Women as I think in the next 5-10 years the women's game will become as popular as the Men's game with the same level of money swilling around it.

[Roosterbooster]

Not needed. We’d lose more than we gained.

At the moment I think you're spot on

[Quicknick]

Stay where we are!

[CnBtruntru]

I don't think crappy catering is a structural issue , CFS does need a rebuild.

[BigGaz]

Don't think calling people backward is a particularly good look

What is it if not backwards? Only other word that comes to mind is selfishness.

With the greatest amount of respect, the folk saying leave it as it is are mostly of an age when times were simpler and they want things as they were accustomed to when they were younger, because that's what they had or enjoyed and some of the modern things that were unobtainable back then aren't as enticing to their demographic.

They don't necessarily want good WiFi, room to swing a cat, a selection of nicer beers, screens playing 'content', light shows, street food, a bit of pomp, comfier seats, a 'matchday experience'. They want the nitty gritty, a monument to things as they were.

For what it's worth a lot of this stuff absolutely does my head in too and I don't want some of it either BUT...

Let me ask you question. If you're ten, and you want to support a club, do you support City, who win every week, often win trophies and the whole affair around the match day is catered just to your liking OR do you pick Burnley, getting pumped most weeks, sitting in a cramped, dilapidated old stadium, no WiFi so you can check your socials or text your mates cause there's no signal, considering if you'll have a boiled hot dog or a burnt pie with a cold filling at H/T. If you're 23 does it get on your nerves that a fifth of your wages is going towards a place you cant check your bets and it's nigh on a fiver for a pint of Carlsberg?

I'm picking City, I don't know about you. I'd wager I know what most kids would say too. It might not be what we want but it's what the kids want. Our future fans that we hope to attract and retain.

So what do we do about them? How do we compete? Or are we selfish and say 'up yours kids?' I want this place exactly as it was in 1962 until the day I physically can't attend any more, because I've got a lift on for shabby chique and I want it all my own way?

At what point do you say 'alright enoughs enough now, time for a refresh'? In another 20 years? When it collapses? When you can't physically go any more?

[dvalley69]

NEWTURF.jpeg

AI nonsense, pie in the sky! You'd think we were a big city of 500,000 residents at that image. Get real and stop faking...

[dvalley69]

What is it if not backwards? Only other word that comes to mind is selfishness.

With the greatest amount of respect, the folk saying leave it as it is are mostly of an age when times were simpler and they want things as they were accustomed to when they were younger, because that's what they had or enjoyed and some of the modern things that were unobtainable back then aren't as enticing to their demographic.

They don't necessarily want good WiFi, room to swing a cat, a selection of nicer beers, screens playing 'content', light shows, street food, a bit of pomp, comfier seats, a 'matchday experience'. They want the nitty gritty, a monument to things as they were.

For what it's worth a lot of this stuff absolutely does my head in too and I don't want some of it either BUT...

Let me ask you question. If you're ten, and you want to support a club, do you support City, who win every week, often win trophies and the whole affair around the match day is catered just to your liking OR do you pick Burnley, getting pumped most weeks, sitting in a cramped, dilapidated old stadium, no WiFi so you can check your socials or text your mates cause there's no signal, considering if you'll have a boiled hot dog or a burnt pie with a cold filling at H/T. If you're 23 does it get on your nerves that a fifth of your wages is going towards a place you cant check your bets and it's nigh on a fiver for a pint of Carlsberg?

I'm picking City, I don't know about you. I'd wager I know what most kids would say too. It might not be what we want but it's what the kids want. Our future fans that we hope to attract and retain.

So what do we do about them? How do we compete? Or are we selfish and say 'up yours kids?' I want this place exactly as it was in 1962 until the day I physically can't attend any more, because I've got a lift on for shabby chique and I want it all my own way?

At what point do you say 'alright enoughs enough now, time for a refresh'? In another 20 years? When it collapses? When you can't physically go any more?

I was 10, at the time, Man Utd pumped everyone. I also watched us, which depending on the season was exciting, successful and, at times, bad. I liked watching UTD, but never went to games. Why would kids of today go and watch City? How is the matchday experience catered to THEIR liking exactly? Coz they won more often than not? We've always been competing against successful and bigger teams. And what a history and success our Club has been, and will be! A new stadium will not bring what you want, only good football and a successful team at the right time will. History tells us all we need to know. Just because we're having a poor season doesn't mean we're gonna lose all kids. Why is now any different to the past? Jesus, one poor season and people are wetting the beds!

[Nori1958]

What is it if not backwards? Only other word that comes to mind is selfishness.

It's a derogatory term for someone who is a little "slow"mentally

[BigGaz]

[

I was 10, at the time, Man Utd pumped everyone. I also watched us, which depending on the season was exciting, successful and, at times, bad. I liked watching UTD, but never went to games. Why would kids of today go and watch City? How is the matchday experience catered to THEIR liking exactly? Coz they won more often than not? We've always been competing against successful and bigger teams. And what a history and success our Club has been, and will be! A new stadium will not bring what you want, only good football and a successful team at the right time will. History tells us all we need to know. Just because we're having a poor season doesn't mean we're gonna lose all kids. Why is now any different to the past? Jesus, one poor season and people are wetting the beds!

The requirement, and it is at the stage a requirement, to update our stadium ( doesn't necessarily have to be a new stadium entirely) is in my case completely decoupled from what's happening on the pitch.

As I mentioned in my last post, I've felt at least half the ground needed sorting out ten years ago so it's not something that I've decided because we're having a bad season.

It's catered to their experience in many ways. They're improving transport links to ground. Increasing car parking. Increased ground capacity. A massive covered fan zone lined with various street food and pop up vendors. A new hotel, a pre and post game entertainment venue. Things for the kids to do - footy tournaments, e-game tournaments, legends wondering around outside the ground stopping to chat. A high volume mesh of WiFi catered for large scale usage. Also given the fans the chance of viewing alternative footage for goals from different angles and taking part in trivia questions for prizes.

They're doing all of that because they've employed a company to go out and find what their fans want and then they've listened to it and acted upon it.

Brighton say "why are you in such a rush to get off after the game? Stay a while in our fan areas, we'll knock the price of food and drink down and your match ticket entitles you to free bus travel around the area so don't worry about getting home". Contrast that with the Turf the other week where I was in the queue for a benny at half time and when the second half started they couldn't slam the shutters down fast enough without a word, leaving scores of queuing people annoyed.

That you think that you don't need any of that (and I'm with you to a point - some of that is great, some of it not) reveals your knowledge of what people are saying they want to see when they go to a game.

All's im saying is that if you like it how it is, I'm glad it works for you, but a portion of modern fans that is too large to ignore want different things and we risk losing fans to others that will offer up a more pleasant experience.

(N.B, by backwards I mean reticent to change, stuck in their ways, of a luddite nature, rather than a loose interpretation of someone being slow)

[Stalbansclaret]

Bit of a daft thread this I think. I mean it’s obviously a pipe dream financially but what’s all the angst re Turf Moor about? I go on for a couple of hours to watch us play and it serves its purpose fine as far as I’m concerned. I’ve been to numerous of the newer stadiums around and, leaving aside the fact that their location is often inconveniently out-of-town I can’t say I’ve been blown away by any great increase in comfort relative to the Turf. I don’t think I am a backward troglodyte but I love Turf Moor.

[Stalbansclaret]

PS. I agree about the WiFi mind you !

[Foshiznik]

Surely if we were to fund a new ground completely, we then wouldn't be able to fund a decent squad for 10-15 years. Needs balancing. The CFS complete rebuild is the priority but new cladding/external covering of the rest of the stadium would modernise the ground and cost a fraction whilst allowing us to still be competitive on the pitch.

I'd rather the latter than have a fancy, modern, artful stadium in league 2.

[Nori1958]

Bit of a daft thread this I think. I mean it’s obviously a pipe dream financially but what’s all the angst re Turf Moor about? I go on for a couple of hours to watch us play and it serves its purpose fine as far as I’m concerned. I’ve been to numerous of the newer stadiums around and, leaving aside the fact that their location is often inconveniently out-of-town I can’t say I’ve been blown away by any great increase in comfort relative to the Turf. I don’t think I am a backward troglodyte but I love Turf Moor.

I agree, the out of town ones take all the enjoyment out of the day

The best new ground is Tottenhams, built on the same site as the old one

Turf moor is fine for our purpose, if we ever have a waiting list of 10k then yes, think about a bigger ground then, but that will never happen.

[Swizzlestick]

Bit of a daft thread this I think. I mean it’s obviously a pipe dream financially but what’s all the angst re Turf Moor about? I go on for a couple of hours to watch us play and it serves its purpose fine as far as I’m concerned. I’ve been to numerous of the newer stadiums around and, leaving aside the fact that their location is often inconveniently out-of-town I can’t say I’ve been blown away by any great increase in comfort relative to the Turf. I don’t think I am a backward troglodyte but I love Turf Moor.

Agreed, I’m a bit baffled. Obviously areas to improve but it’s a fine ground for us and still holds a lot of character and, crucially, situated in town. A lot of away fans like the ground too, certainly the ones I’ve met over the years.

[bfcjg]

The location of Turf Moor is absolutely essential to the heart and soul of Burnley football club, the pre match rituals of a pub crawl,or favourite pub then a short trip to the ground is as much a part of the match day experience as the game itself. The CFS needs rebuilding but the requirements of the cricket club will make this difficult so I think it's imperative to do some win win deal with them even if it means relocating for a year or so their footprint can then be altered to make up for lost land along the CFS perhaps relocate the club house onto the BFC carpark or give up the BFC carpark to be grassed over. The cricket club will never move permanently and why should they leave their cash cow,we need imaginative discussions with them.

[dsr]

Let me ask you question. If you're ten, and you want to support a club, do you support City, who win every week, often win trophies and the whole affair around the match day is catered just to your liking OR do you pick Burnley, getting pumped most weeks, sitting in a cramped, dilapidated old stadium, no WiFi so you can check your socials or text your mates cause there's no signal, considering if you'll have a boiled hot dog or a burnt pie with a cold filling at H/T. If you're 23 does it get on your nerves that a fifth of your wages is going towards a place you cant check your bets and it's nigh on a fiver for a pint of Carlsberg?

Is that a p[ractical solution? You want us to win every week and often win trophies? I think for football fans, even junior football fans, that would be more important than checking bets and drinking cheaper beer at half time.

As for Brighton who you mentioned in a later post, the reason they encourage people to stop behind is because the public transport is so awful that it takes 45 minutes to get away (if you wait for full time) and you can't drive there.

[daveisaclaret]

Let me ask you question. If you're ten, and you want to support a club, do you support City, who win every week, often win trophies and the whole affair around the match day is catered just to your liking OR do you pick Burnley, getting pumped most weeks, sitting in a cramped, dilapidated old stadium, no WiFi so you can check your socials or text your mates cause there's no signal, considering if you'll have a boiled hot dog or a burnt pie with a cold filling at H/T. If you're 23 does it get on your nerves that a fifth of your wages is going towards a place you cant check your bets and it's nigh on a fiver for a pint of Carlsberg?

I'm picking City, I don't know about you. I'd wager I know what most kids would say too. It might not be what we want but it's what the kids want. Our future fans that we hope to attract and retain.

Who is this ten year old from Burnley who makes the decision to go to the Etihad? Absolutely mental line of thinking.

[dandeclaret]

What is it if not backwards? Only other word that comes to mind is selfishness.

With the greatest amount of respect, the folk saying leave it as it is are mostly of an age when times were simpler and they want things as they were accustomed to when they were younger, because that's what they had or enjoyed and some of the modern things that were unobtainable back then aren't as enticing to their demographic.

They don't necessarily want good WiFi, room to swing a cat, a selection of nicer beers, screens playing 'content', light shows, street food, a bit of pomp, comfier seats, a 'matchday experience'. They want the nitty gritty, a monument to things as they were.

For what it's worth a lot of this stuff absolutely does my head in too and I don't want some of it either BUT...

Let me ask you question. If you're ten, and you want to support a club, do you support City, who win every week, often win trophies and the whole affair around the match day is catered just to your liking OR do you pick Burnley, getting pumped most weeks, sitting in a cramped, dilapidated old stadium, no WiFi so you can check your socials or text your mates cause there's no signal, considering if you'll have a boiled hot dog or a burnt pie with a cold filling at H/T. If you're 23 does it get on your nerves that a fifth of your wages is going towards a place you cant check your bets and it's nigh on a fiver for a pint of Carlsberg?

I'm picking City, I don't know about you. I'd wager I know what most kids would say too. It might not be what we want but it's what the kids want. Our future fans that we hope to attract and retain.

So what do we do about them? How do we compete? Or are we selfish and say 'up yours kids?' I want this place exactly as it was in 1962 until the day I physically can't attend any more, because I've got a lift on for shabby chique and I want it all my own way?

At what point do you say 'alright enoughs enough now, time for a refresh'? In another 20 years? When it collapses? When you can't physically go any more?

How did anybody support Burnley when Liverpool or Man Utd were winning anything? Because the ground wasn’t owt special then either.

In your new nirvana for 10 year olds, can we push the boat out and have clapper sticks and a drummer in order to
Generate an atmosphere…. Seems pretty much every new stadium has to have those:

[claretonthecoast1882]

What is it if not backwards? Only other word that comes to mind is selfishness.

With the greatest amount of respect, the folk saying leave it as it is are mostly of an age when times were simpler and they want things as they were accustomed to when they were younger, because that's what they had or enjoyed and some of the modern things that were unobtainable back then aren't as enticing to their demographic.

They don't necessarily want good WiFi, room to swing a cat, a selection of nicer beers, screens playing 'content', light shows, street food, a bit of pomp, comfier seats, a 'matchday experience'. They want the nitty gritty, a monument to things as they were.

For what it's worth a lot of this stuff absolutely does my head in too and I don't want some of it either BUT...

Let me ask you question. If you're ten, and you want to support a club, do you support City, who win every week, often win trophies and the whole affair around the match day is catered just to your liking OR do you pick Burnley, getting pumped most weeks, sitting in a cramped, dilapidated old stadium, no WiFi so you can check your socials or text your mates cause there's no signal, considering if you'll have a boiled hot dog or a burnt pie with a cold filling at H/T. If you're 23 does it get on your nerves that a fifth of your wages is going towards a place you cant check your bets and it's nigh on a fiver for a pint of Carlsberg?

I'm picking City, I don't know about you. I'd wager I know what most kids would say too. It might not be what we want but it's what the kids want. Our future fans that we hope to attract and retain.

So what do we do about them? How do we compete? Or are we selfish and say 'up yours kids?' I want this place exactly as it was in 1962 until the day I physically can't attend any more, because I've got a lift on for shabby chique and I want it all my own way?

At what point do you say 'alright enoughs enough now, time for a refresh'? In another 20 years? When it collapses? When you can't physically go any more?

Must admit I have never heard a fan of any club when asked why do you support (insert any club you want) they reply cos of the food and wifi.

This is taking whinging to a whole new level. Why on earth does anyone go to football and think "let me check my socials" I would prefer those type of people do go to City.

[quoonbeatz]

None of the new grounds are as good as the old ones. None of them have any soul. Spurs is about the best but it's still nowhere near as good as WHL.

[Bordeauxclaret]

I think we should compromise, keep the current ground but build a decent WiFi network.
Sorted

[AlargeClaret]

When was the last time a pint was “ nigh on a fiver “ ? .

[Roosterbooster]

Let me ask you question. If you're ten, and you want to support a club, do you support City, who win every week, often win trophies and the whole affair around the match day is catered just to your liking OR do you pick Burnley, getting pumped most weeks, sitting in a cramped, dilapidated old stadium, no WiFi so you can check your socials or text your mates cause there's no signal, considering if you'll have a boiled hot dog or a burnt pie with a cold filling at H/T.

If you're 23 does it get on your nerves that a fifth of your wages is going towards a place you cant check your bets and it's nigh on a fiver for a pint of Carlsberg?

My kids aren't particularly fussed about the stadium being posh. They like seeing Bertie Bee, and having simple food. They like the walk up to the ground with the stadium subtly revealing itself. They like seeing their cousins. They love it when we win. And hate losing. But always want to come back. Things could be better. But there is more than enough to keep them happy. The choice for them isn't fancy stadium vs old traditional stadium, or winning vs losing. It's about being in a place they feel they belong, and have a connection to.

And if a 23 year old is more fussed about checking their bets (when they're spending 20% of their wage on a football match) than watching the game then I'm not sure it matters what the ground is like

I'll be honest, I enjoyed the City match last season. But it felt more like a day out at a theme park than a football match. And it's similar for pretty much every new stadium. It even felt that way for Old Trafford. But the most exciting away games are the ones where the stadium is nestled in its surroundings. Luton is a dump. And the ground and view are rubbish. And I'm not saying that should be the aim, but irrelevant of the result, I enjoyed it much more. And it's the same as when I was a kid. It means more

[Stockbrokerbelt]

The modern day owner doesn’t care about fans feelings I’m afraid it’s a money making business. If they could they’d build a new stadium heavily designed for corporate occasions and maximum profit . Brentford, Brighton , Everton , have all done it

Tosh, he is more visible than previous owners, has footprints on social media & does actually care & comes across very well. What do you want? Invite to tea, seat in the dressing room on match days? What other owners of prem clubs or big businesses are approachable or more visible.

[BigGaz]

quote=claretonthecoast1882 post_id=2266503 time=1706522824 user_id=4404]
Must admit I have never heard a fan of any club when asked why do you support (insert any club you want) they reply cos of the food and wifi.

This is taking whinging to a whole new level. Why on earth does anyone go to football and think "let me check my socials" I would prefer those type of people do go to City.
[/quote]

Pooh pooh it all you like. What I know, because I do this for a job, is that younger fans (from millennials onward) want this kind of thing. City also know this because they employed a firm that does similar things to what I do and they found it out for theirselves. Fans want to interact with other fans in real time on twitter, insta, whatever. They want to host or consume live feeds from people at the ground. They want to post 'banter' on club pages. They want to share their betting activity - tonnes of reasons.

Let's say you get your own way and these people did go to City just because this type of fan behaviour isn't your cup of tea - what then of our attendances, our revenue, our future fanbase growth?

You may not like it, you might not agree with it, but whilst no fan picks a team solely on a matchday experience, it absolutely does

- influence decision making on where to go if you haven't got a team and are looking to start wanting to follow football/take children.
- affect how much fans will spend when they're attending
- whether or not they can be bothered going.
- affects fanbase growth

Data, gathered from fans just like you and me tells us that. It's immutable, factual, and it doesn't care what your feelings or are about it.

Organic fanbase growth is the hot topic for clubs right now. Sure, all these bigger clubs were around back in the day, but they weren't anywhere near as aggressive about capturing and protecting revenue streams back then.

No, it's high time the boomer NIMBYism that has this country paralysed shouldn't be allowed to affect and influence the clubs growth. The kids are alright.

[Quickenthetempo]

quote=claretonthecoast1882 post_id=2266503 time=1706522824 user_id=4404]
Must admit I have never heard a fan of any club when asked why do you support (insert any club you want) they reply cos of the food and wifi.

This is taking whinging to a whole new level. Why on earth does anyone go to football and think "let me check my socials" I would prefer those type of people do go to City.

Pooh pooh it all you like. What I know, because I do this for a job, is that younger fans (from millennials onward) want this kind of thing. City also know this because they employed a firm that does similar things to what I do and they found it out for theirselves. Fans want to interact with other fans in real time on twitter, insta, whatever. They want to host or consume live feeds from people at the ground. They want to post 'banter' on club pages. They want to share their betting activity - tonnes of reasons.

Let's say you get your own way and these people did go to City just because this type of fan behaviour isn't your cup of tea - what then of our attendances, our revenue, our future fanbase growth?

You may not like it, you might not agree with it, but whilst no fan picks a team solely on a matchday experience, it absolutely does

- influence decision making on where to go if you haven't got a team and are looking to start wanting to follow football/take children.
- affect how much fans will spend when they're attending
- whether or not they can be bothered going.
- affects fanbase growth

Data, gathered from fans just like you and me tells us that. It's immutable, factual, and it doesn't care what your feelings or are about it.

Organic fanbase growth is the hot topic for clubs right now. Sure, all these bigger clubs were around back in the day, but they weren't anywhere near as aggressive about capturing and protecting revenue streams back then.

No, it's high time the boomer NIMBYism that has this country paralysed shouldn't be allowed to affect and influence the clubs growth. The kids are alright.
[/quote]
Kids will go wherever their parents take them.

Tommy ten year old isn't allowed on the football on his own anymore.

[Roosterbooster]

Should we be catering to all the 10 year olds who just want to come to the game to live stream themselves and digitise the game?

Or should we work to create an environment where watching the game negates the need to spend the entire time on your phone?

I'd honestly rather have 500 proper fans in the conference, than 50,000 people on their phones at a Champions Leaue game

[dsr]

Pooh pooh it all you like. What I know, because I do this for a job, is that younger fans (from millennials onward) want this kind of thing. City also know this because they employed a firm that does similar things to what I do and they found it out for theirselves. Fans want to interact with other fans in real time on twitter, insta, whatever. They want to host or consume live feeds from people at the ground. They want to post 'banter' on club pages. They want to share their betting activity - tonnes of reasons.

Let's say you get your own way and these people did go to City just because this type of fan behaviour isn't your cup of tea - what then of our attendances, our revenue, our future fanbase growth?

You may not like it, you might not agree with it, but whilst no fan picks a team solely on a matchday experience, it absolutely does

- influence decision making on where to go if you haven't got a team and are looking to start wanting to follow football/take children.
- affect how much fans will spend when they're attending
- whether or not they can be bothered going.
- affects fanbase growth

Data, gathered from fans just like you and me tells us that. It's immutable, factual, and it doesn't care what your feelings or are about it.

Organic fanbase growth is the hot topic for clubs right now. Sure, all these bigger clubs were around back in the day, but they weren't anywhere near as aggressive about capturing and protecting revenue streams back then.

No, it's high time the boomer NIMBYism that has this country paralysed shouldn't be allowed to affect and influence the clubs growth. The kids are alright.

But surely it would be possible to improve the wifi without having to build a whole new ground?

[Tribesmen]

A new CFS and that will do it for the next 10 years

[GetIntoEm]

where as i cannot see it happening in the near future, are people serious that they wouldnt attend if they moved grounds? like really serious, or just trying to be edgy?

[Clovius Boofus]

96 posts on something that isn't going to happen.

[Dyched]

With then engineering work that been going on at various grounds (R Madrid, Barca, Liverpool), taking the roof off the north and east stands and extending them backwards to allow a bigger concourse in the upper tiers and a roof that actually does what it’s suppose to could work. This then would possibly allow changing rooms to be in the north stand. Then the cricket field could be redone easier. Might not need a total rebuild.

[jrgbfc]

where as i cannot see it happening in the near future, are people serious that they wouldnt attend if they moved grounds? like really serious, or just trying to be edgy?

To a lot of folk the day out having a few pints with mates is as important as the actual game itself. Generally the newer grounds are in terrible locations with hardly any pubs around.

[dsr]

With then engineering work that been going on at various grounds (R Madrid, Barca, Liverpool), taking the roof off the north and east stands and extending them backwards to allow a bigger concourse in the upper tiers and a roof that actually does what it’s suppose to could work. This then would possibly allow changing rooms to be in the north stand. Then the cricket field could be redone easier. Might not need a total rebuild.

The Longside and Jimmy Mac stands face the wind and rain. There is no way to keep the front row dry, even if a downward sloping, overhanging roof like the Bob Lord was used. They could keep a few more rows dry, perhaps, but not all rows.

Besides which, replacing the roof of two stands and rebuilding a third may not be a total rebuild, but it wouldn't be cheaper than a total rebuild I wouldn't have thought.