How about a small increase in capacity at Turf Moor....

Dyched · Post by **Dyched** » Mon May 01, 2017 6:50 pm

If there was 2/3000 fans locked out every home game it'll make sense. But there's not. As people have already said give disabled fans better facilities.

Paul Waine · Post by **Paul Waine** » Mon May 01, 2017 6:51 pm

Have you guys got no ambition? and no vision?

A couple of seasons in the Premier League will put Burnley and North East Lancs "on the map." The local population will grow: already an attractive place to live at the price for a house. New fans will flock to Burnley from outside the town to watch the Clarets in the Premier League. We should make them all feel welcome with some "spare" capacity in the stadium.

In a few years Leisure will be running a coach service from Manchester airport to bring the European Burnley fans to the ground - not least those following the favourite European footballer(s) to Burnley.

UTC

Top Claret · Post by **Top Claret** » Mon May 01, 2017 6:57 pm

No point in spending millions to accommodate an extra couple of thousand, not financially viable. The club should rack up the price of season tickets if they want to generate more income

Goody1975 · Post by **Goody1975** » Mon May 01, 2017 7:09 pm

I think the club should do absolutely nothing and wait until the stands need knocking down or even better spend money hand over fist maintaining them year on year, they can then cross their fingers and hope they have some cash in the bank to do something when they are forced to do so.

Alternatively......

Goody1975 · Post by **Goody1975** » Mon May 01, 2017 7:12 pm

Redevelopment - Yes
Anything more than a nominal capacity increase (beyond 23,000) - Definitely No

We have thousands of restricted view seats and substandard concourse facilities, add to this the appalling disabled facilities and there are your ground redevelopment needs.

Jamesy · Post by **Jamesy** » Mon May 01, 2017 7:12 pm

Martin was nearly 2 million people short. Population of London is almost 9 million.

TonbridgeClaret · Post by **TonbridgeClaret** » Mon May 01, 2017 7:14 pm

Quickenthetempo wrote:Let's say £50m for the new stand for 7500 seats.

£400 average for ST. 7500x400= 3m per year.

So 17 seasons at full sell outs to pay off before we start making profit.

The Liberty stadium cost £27 million, the King Power stadium cost £37 million, the KCOM stadium cost £44 million. That's for the whole stadium, not a single stand! Would a second tier on the Bob Lord, or redeveloping the CFS really cost £50 million?

tim_noone · Post by **tim_noone** » Mon May 01, 2017 7:14 pm

Paul Waine wrote:Have you guys got no ambition? and no vision?

A couple of seasons in the Premier League will put Burnley and North East Lancs "on the map." The local population will grow: already an attractive place to live at the price for a house. New fans will flock to Burnley from outside the town to watch the Clarets in the Premier League. We should make them all feel welcome with some "spare" capacity in the stadium.

In a few years Leisure will be running a coach service from Manchester airport to bring the European Burnley fans to the ground - not least those following the favourite European footballer(s) to Burnley.

UTC

Premiership football guarantees more fans. If were relegated doesnt come into it.the increase should cater for the disabled the less well off children who are the future and away fans,as ive said before the city teams would easy bring 10.000.easy. and the cricketfield stand is the ideal site for construction.entry from brunshaw rd.emergency exits to the cricketfield. Away fans half the long side.enter from belvedere rd. If spurs can build a new ground in a densley populated area,we can build one stand ffs! Get with the times

tim_noone · Post by **tim_noone** » Mon May 01, 2017 7:26 pm

Jamesy wrote:Martin was nearly 2 million people short. Population of London is almost 9 million.

Yes point taken.....i ts the lure of the premiership though nowt to do with the population and burnley will attract more support as a premiership club.if it was about londons population alone orient in the same catchment area along with daganham and redbridge would be getting 30.000crowds 20,000 increase at west ham equates to premiership football.....

gawthorpe_view · Post by **gawthorpe_view** » Mon May 01, 2017 7:45 pm

IanMcL wrote:Leave the BLS alone! The view. to the Pennines, from Longside Upper is fabulous!

Only a dozen so rows, also I thought the Pennines were behind the Longside not in front of it.

Moggybfc · Post by **Moggybfc** » Mon May 01, 2017 7:48 pm

I reckon a new 7500 stand would probably cost around 10 million, Also if I remember there are issues with the C.F. stand and we need to buy the cricket club out

I would like us to move the players tunnel between JM and JH and above this could be a stand for disabled people at least this would use one corner section up

TonbridgeClaret · Post by **TonbridgeClaret** » Mon May 01, 2017 7:58 pm

Great idea Moggy. Doing those the things would take capacity up to around 28,000 and would only cost as much as Robbie Brady!

gawthorpe_view · Post by **gawthorpe_view** » Mon May 01, 2017 8:02 pm

Moggybfc wrote:I reckon a new 7500 stand would probably cost around 10 million, Also if I remember there are issues with the C.F. stand and we need to buy the cricket club out

I would like us to move the players tunnel between JM and JH and above this could be a stand for disabled people at least this would use one corner section up

It will be one heck of a tunnel, unless you move the changing rooms at the same time.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Mon May 01, 2017 8:07 pm

gawthorpe_view wrote:It will be one heck of a tunnel, unless you move the changing rooms at the same time.

And new modern changing rooms would stick out a mile into the car park in that corner.

jedi_master · Post by **jedi_master** » Mon May 01, 2017 8:13 pm

Capacity increase doesn't necessarily have to be for home fans...we could sell more away tickets quite easily. That might be a controversial opinion, but it needs stating.

I think if we stay up at the end of 17/18, at that point you can probably make more grandiose plans around stadium redevelopment than the odd lick of paint. It really is time for a new stand, be that the CFS or Bob Lord on more of an infrastructure/appearance level and with the added bonus of more potential corporate space. We have shown our ambition on the pitch with the likes of Brady, Defour and Hendrick, and off the pitch with the training ground, I don't think it is too pie in the sky to suggest that the board will be seriously looking at the next steps for Turf Moor at this stage.

summitclaret · Post by **summitclaret** » Mon May 01, 2017 8:14 pm

KRBFC said "I sat behind a pillar for years on end. "

Well that explains a hell of a lot.

Jamesy · Post by **Jamesy** » Mon May 01, 2017 8:15 pm

Didn't we pay the paltry sum of 8 million to Linpave? For the two newer stands. They do look basic now but how much would that have been in today's money? 30 million?

Duffer_ · Post by **Duffer_** » Mon May 01, 2017 8:27 pm

Jamesy wrote:Didn't we pay the paltry sum of 8 million to Linpave? For the two newer stands. They do look basic now but how much would that have been in today's money? 30 million?

£8m in 1996 would be worth £10.5m today according to:

http://www.moneysorter.co.uk/calculator ... calculator" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

UTC!

Stayingup · Post by **Stayingup** » Mon May 01, 2017 8:27 pm

If we stay up we will attract more support I think. Also there are at least seven games where the away support could be increased by 2000 minumum. However any increase in capacity will obviously cost so a payback calculation will be made. Cost against incressed revenue. The atmosphere is good now but would be improved again with two corners built up. In reality tge CFS and BL are badly outdated.

BleedingClaret · Post by **BleedingClaret** » Mon May 01, 2017 8:30 pm

martin_p wrote:Problem is, unless a new stand can be built close season then you have a reduced capacity for a period of time.

No I'm working on a design to be built above the Bob Lord stand, supporting itself, the base of which would be built in the summer and would be the new roof for the Bob lord stand, removing the old roof and visually obstructive stantions.
Work would carry on above this solid base/roof structure into the season, obviously not on match days,
Above 'this will be a large glass backed area that will maintain the best view in football. It will be a glass backed open area, incorporating a disabled section home and away to either wing and centrally a seating/table area for refreshments, but not the actual kiosks. The view will only be interuppted 'Lowry style' by bodies of the people 'mill'ing around.
This area will be used, as a hireable venue.
Above this will be a Seated stand, half home half away, holding 4000 in total, 2000 home and 2000 away including some corporate.
All the refreshment for this area, including for the venue will be behind the seating.
The capacity of Turf Moor will be 25,000 plus
The second phase will divide the CFS equally between home and away into a rail seating/standing area, this reinstates away capacity to 4000, about right for Turf Moor and both complies with the coming rule that away fans should have pitch side sections and gives away fans un obstructed seating areas and standing area, which is needed.
Also the CFS home section is increased to match the away allocation size.
To the rear of the CFS a strip of land will be purchased from the Cricket club providing a walk way and extra gates and turnstiles for the CFS these gates will be opened 15 minutes after kick off time into the area that will then be gated off and split home and away to solve congestion issues in the CFS especially at half time.
The side turnstile will still be open for late comers early leavers etc.

Juan Tanamera · Post by **Juan Tanamera** » Mon May 01, 2017 8:39 pm

The Bob Lord stand is 43 years old and the CFS is nigh on 50 years old.
We could wait till we're skint again or we could strike while the iron's hot, as they say.
Rebuild them both now while there is cash in the bank.

Herts Clarets · Post by **Herts Clarets** » Mon May 01, 2017 8:42 pm

tim_noone wrote:So 20,000 decided you know what im gonna support west ham next season... right.

West Ham sold out their home allocation every home game at the Boleyn and had a waiting list for season tickets.

jedi_master · Post by **jedi_master** » Mon May 01, 2017 8:42 pm

Juan Tanamera wrote:The Bob Lord stand is 43 years old and the CFS is nigh on 50 years old.
We could wait till we're skint again or we could strike while the iron's hot, as they say.
Rebuild them both now while there is cash in the bank.

I think they may well look at doing both when the time comes (i.e, as one project).

I would imagine the most viable way to replace both stands would be to do a half bowl (ala the Brittania stadium or whatever Stoke's ground is called these days). People might cry at the thought, but that would probably allow a few thousand increase in capacity, grant a ton more corporate possibilities, a disabled area that has actually been thought out and built into the design and would modernise our ground for the next 20-30 years.

Claretmatt4 · Post by **Claretmatt4** » Mon May 01, 2017 8:44 pm

Bleedingclaret, get in touch with the club!

Ightenclaret · Post by **Ightenclaret** » Mon May 01, 2017 8:50 pm

I don't want the view over to Crown Point disturbed.
Alright?

LoveCurryPies · Post by **LoveCurryPies** » Mon May 01, 2017 8:58 pm

One of the problems with increasing capacity is the problem of traffic and parking. Only takes 5 minutes for most of us to reach our cars but 45 minutes to reach the motorway network.

Ightenclaret · Post by **Ightenclaret** » Mon May 01, 2017 9:05 pm

come on Brentford.

randomclaret2 · Post by **randomclaret2** » Mon May 01, 2017 9:10 pm

Wasn't there a virtually identical thread to this 3 or 4 weeks back ?

Quickenthetempo · Post by **Quickenthetempo** » Mon May 01, 2017 9:24 pm

I plucked the 50m out of thin air based on Liverpools new stand costing 115m for 20k people, Spurs new ground costing 400m or whatever.
From a building perspective itcs cheaper to build from a blank canvas rather than alterations and timescales put the price up a lot. Swansea and Southampton building new grounds would have had as much time as needed while we would need it doing asap with it reducing capacity.

It was the Liverpool CE that stated it's only worth building if you increase corporate.

burnmark · Post by **burnmark** » Mon May 01, 2017 9:26 pm

I actually think support will drop slightly next season as the novelty of the PL will wear off for some.

BleedingClaret · Post by **BleedingClaret** » Mon May 01, 2017 9:29 pm

Claretmatt4 wrote:Bleedingclaret, get in touch with the club!

I once met with Dave Edmundson to discuss renting, full time for business, an area in the Jimmy Mac and suggested they could have it as a business area linked to the corporate boxes, suggesting that they'd get some affluent companies in if they also had a corporate match viewing area as part of the deal, at the time those v
boxes were completely unused. He sent me packing with some disdain and now it's a business hub.

gawthorpe_view · Post by **gawthorpe_view** » Mon May 01, 2017 9:38 pm

summitclaret wrote:KRBFC said "I sat behind a pillar for years on end. "

Well that explains a hell of a lot.

I thought he was the pillar (sp).

Stayingup · Post by **Stayingup** » Mon May 01, 2017 9:42 pm

BleedingClaret wrote:No I'm working on a design to be built above the Bob Lord stand, supporting itself, the base of which would be built in the summer and would be the new roof for the Bob lord stand, removing the old roof and visually obstructive stantions.
Work would carry on above this solid base/roof structure into the season, obviously not on match days,
Above 'this will be a large glass backed area that will maintain the best view in football. It will be a glass backed open area, incorporating a disabled section home and away to either wing and centrally a seating/table area for refreshments, but not the actual kiosks. The view will only be interuppted 'Lowry style' by bodies of the people 'mill'ing around.
This area will be used, as a hireable venue.
Above this will be a Seated stand, half home half away, holding 4000 in total, 2000 home and 2000 away including some corporate.
All the refreshment for this area, including for the venue will be behind the seating.
The capacity of Turf Moor will be 25,000 plus
The second phase will divide the CFS equally between home and away into a rail seating/standing area, this reinstates away capacity to 4000, about right for Turf Moor and both complies with the coming rule that away fans should have pitch side sections and gives away fans un obstructed seating areas and standing area, which is needed.
Also the CFS home section is increased to match the away allocation size.
To the rear of the CFS a strip of land will be purchased from the Cricket club providing a walk way and extra gates and turnstiles for the CFS these gates will be opened 15 minutes after kick off time into the area that will then be gated off and split home and away to solve congestion issues in the CFS especially at half time.
The side turnstile will still be open for late comers early leavers etc.

The idea of a glass back is a good one. The corners could be closed off that way too - like the Irish rugby ground. That would both improve the atmosphere and reduce the wind.

BleedingClaret · Post by **BleedingClaret** » Mon May 01, 2017 9:46 pm

Stayingup wrote:The idea of a glass back is a good one. The corners could be closed off that way too - like the Irish rugby ground. That would both improve the atmosphere and reduce the wind.

Sort of envisage the disabled areas to the ends with the home one bigger reaching round to the Jimmy Mac

Funkydrummer · Post by **Funkydrummer** » Mon May 01, 2017 9:48 pm

If the increased capacity is as a consequence of ground development, then all well and good.
Otherwise it's not necessary.

dushanbe · Post by **dushanbe** » Mon May 01, 2017 10:14 pm

Imagine if we drew Lincoln in the cup again. Now they are in League 2, they'd want 15,000 tickets easily.

claretandy · Post by **claretandy** » Tue May 02, 2017 5:49 am

Quickenthetempo wrote:I plucked the 50m out of thin air based on Liverpools new stand costing 115m for 20k people, Spurs new ground costing 400m or whatever.
From a building perspective itcs cheaper to build from a blank canvas rather than alterations and timescales put the price up a lot. Swansea and Southampton building new grounds would have had as much time as needed while we would need it doing asap with it reducing capacity.

It was the Liverpool CE that stated it's only worth building if you increase corporate.

Liverpools stand cost this much because they had to buy rows and rows of terraced housing behind the new stand, same with Spurs but at London prices.

Claretmatt4 · Post by **Claretmatt4** » Tue May 02, 2017 7:31 am

It may take 18 months but would it be possible to replace BL and CFS with a single tiered stand that reached all the way around both? We could have state if the art facilities for disabled fans and they would have the choice view from behind the goal or side on.

Ensure there are significant corporate facilities in there o ensure the ROI is maximized from a business point of view.

Get away fans in the corner, pull them out from behind the goals and give us 2/3 of the CFS.

Build new dressing rooms for the teams and enable them to come out from the stand that replaces the Bob Lord.

This would fulfill a lot of things we need and would also like to have without creating a 30,000 seater white elephant. I don't think the capacity increase would be more than 2 or 3 thousand.

Yeah do that!

Spijed · Post by **Spijed** » Tue May 02, 2017 7:35 am

Goody1975 wrote:Redevelopment - Yes
Anything more than a nominal capacity increase (beyond 23,000) - Definitely No

We have thousands of restricted view seats and substandard concourse facilities, add to this the appalling disabled facilities and there are your ground redevelopment needs.

The concourse facilities at the Etihad and Emirates are no better than what we have, and they are supposed to be state of the art stadiums. Try moving around at Arsenal during half time and you'll know what I mean. It's a rubbish stadium.

RammyClaret61 · Post by **RammyClaret61** » Tue May 02, 2017 7:55 am

burnmark wrote:I actually think support will drop slightly next season as the novelty of the PL will wear off for some.

Maybe we could've encouraged those that are fickle with something like a............ retainer!

Claretforever · Post by **Claretforever** » Tue May 02, 2017 8:07 am

Jamesy wrote:Didn't we pay the paltry sum of 8 million to Linpave? For the two newer stands. They do look basic now but how much would that have been in today's money? 30 million?

We committed to £5.3m for the two stands, for which we got an award of some sort for getting the best deal for new development at the time I recall? Anyway, we eventually paid £5m as Clive Holt, who oversaw the project, too Kind linoave to court, or at least threatened to, over contractual obligations missed.

Claretforever · Post by **Claretforever** » Tue May 02, 2017 8:13 am

ClaretTony · Post by **ClaretTony** » Tue May 02, 2017 9:46 am

Lord Beamish wrote:I do think that the pitiful state of our Disabled Provision will force our hand in going ahead with re-developing one of the two older stands(probably the CFS). I can't see any other way of us managing to significantly improve this neglected side of our Social Responsibility within the current infrastructure of the stadium. A new, purpose built stand, in place of the current CFS could be designed, with state of the art facilities for the disabled, a little extra capacity(not too much), a concourse that doesn't resemble a cramped, gloomy cave, and, and not least, no stanchions.

Doesn't work like that - disabled facilities have to be provided in different areas of the ground, not just in one stand, so that idea wouldn't work. The club are working towards August 2018 in providing the necessary disabled facilities. They will be extensive.

I've not read the entire thread but I agree with those who suggest there is no need for an increased capacity. As for filling in the corners, I don't think it would work in any of the four corners given the positioning of the four stands.

Turfytop · Post by **Turfytop** » Tue May 02, 2017 10:17 am

We could just fill the corners in like they have at Watford , rangers, West Brom etc, and try and keep the atmosphere in

ClaretTony · Post by **ClaretTony** » Tue May 02, 2017 10:20 am

Turfytop wrote:We could just fill the corners in like they have at Watford , rangers, West Brom etc, and try and keep the atmosphere in

Which corners? Potentially the corner between the Longside and cricket field but no chance with the others I wouldn't have thought given the positioning of the stands.

Dyched · Post by **Dyched** » Tue May 02, 2017 10:38 am

I can't see why the corners can't be filled in. Yes they don't line up properly so it won't look as one like many new stadiums. But plenty of grounds have corners filled in with different style stands. Look at chelsea, everton, liverpool.

Corky · Post by **Corky** » Tue May 02, 2017 11:03 am

I had a word with Clive Holt about filling in the corners some years ago and his view at the time was that it would be quite problematic and the cost disproportionate to the comparatively small gains.

I do like BleedingClarets idea though and it would allow to move the changing rooms to what is now the town end of the BLS which would then make it easier to redevelop the CFS.

And as CT has mentioned we need to provide disabled access/accommodation on all 4 sides of the ground so will presumably in so doing lose seats to wheelchair bound fans so we will needs to look to recoup seating elsewhere.

Quickenthetempo · Post by **Quickenthetempo** » Tue May 02, 2017 11:35 am

claretandy wrote:Liverpools stand cost this much because they had to buy rows and rows of terraced housing behind the new stand, same with Spurs but at London prices.

Liverpool have been buying houses around the ground for 30 years, I don't know if they have put the cost into the new stand accounts. The council put most of the houses on compulsory purchase orders with the houses being sold for as little as 30k.

No doubt the cost added up for keeping the stand open and adding to it rather than knocking down and starting a fresh though.

The Bob Lord stand would cost quite a bit as the function rooms and board room etc.. are in there and would need to be included.

Corky · Post by **Corky** » Tue May 02, 2017 11:47 am

Just a thought. Has anyone asked the Club (Chairman or Directors) what their views are or indeed if there are any long term plans to redevelop. Consultation with fans groups?

Inchy · Post by **Inchy** » Tue May 02, 2017 12:04 pm

I don't see much point in redeveloping at the moment. I certainly would leave the cricket field stand alone as I think its one of the best stands in the Prem. Its old school and has great atmosphere

If we did anything I would prefer we redeveloped the Bob Lord stand. We could do something similar to the stand behind the goal at Palace with all the cooperate boxes.