The board looking at a new stadium to replace Turf Moor

Somethingfishy · Post by **Somethingfishy** » Wed May 10, 2017 10:56 am

Without being controversial..although ultimately it will be perceived that way...I think the small town..dont want change mentality that Burnley folk seem to display is rearing its head here.

There is plenty of sentimentality with several parts of our town and in a lot of cases it is misjudged and prevents progress and modernisation and we usually end up with something halfway that is unsuitable for the old fashioned brigade and the modernisers. People were up in arms when the market hall was demolished (so i am told) and we modernised. It was badly designed though and now we are left with a mish mash shopping area.

We have to look at every possibility. It really does come down to finance and if it was cheaper to build a stadium than to redevelop what we have got then it would make sound business sense. The football world has moved on massively in the last 30 years. We do not want to risk standing still.

Having said that I have been to several of these new grounds and you have to be careful they don't become boring and soulless. That is the tricky bit in design. The Macron looks great from outside (imo) but inside it is disappointing..same could be said of Huddersfield and Preston (which has been built in stages and is modern but plain inside)

If it comes down to it (and would be massively important) it really would need fan involvement in the planning and design. It would have to be done right and not to a set blueprint given to us.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed May 10, 2017 11:02 am

Again (though I do take your point about the small town mentality) where is the justification for moving from Turf Moor coming from?

Sell outs and massive queues? No

Massively increase in corporate clients? Possibly, but only on continued membership of PL, which is not guaranteed

We've modernised and built from scratch a purpose built training and academy centre, we've got a brand new (very good) shop and we continue to make massive strides on the football pitch.

How much further can we realistically go? And does a new stadium (say 30,000 capacity) get us far enough along to justify the cost?

Not in my mind I'm afraid

RidgeClaret · Post by **RidgeClaret** » Wed May 10, 2017 11:11 am

If we aren't then we should be - not a new stadium but redevelopment of Turf Moor.

The 2 older stands are looking really dated now and won't last forever. We have never been in a better position financially and are guaranteed at least ￡270m over 5 years even if we are relegated next season. So the business case for redevelopment now is very strong.

Whilst we would all like to see most the money spent on players that's not going to happen and we don't want to give a large slice to the tax man either.

It's obvious that the directors are not going to rebuild the BL having just spent money on a new club shop/offices etc so a new CF stand something along the lines of PNE's Shankly stand wouldn't be too expensive. It holds approx. 6,000 so would increase our capacity to around 25k which would be more than enough.

ElectroClaret · Post by **ElectroClaret** » Wed May 10, 2017 11:17 am

Agree with Lancaster.... No justification for this, a completely pointless venture if it happens.
The CFS and the BL could be completely renovated/ renewed at a fraction of the cost if required.

This IS a case for keeping our powder well and truly dry.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Wed May 10, 2017 11:20 am

bob-the-scutter wrote:Punctuation son!!........all your thread title was bereft of was a ? Think on lad!

I know, while our new stadium is being built we can play our home games at Wembley!

If you're going to criticise someone elses punctuation then at least learn how to correctly use ellipses.

bob-the-scutter · Post by **bob-the-scutter** » Wed May 10, 2017 11:33 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:If you're going to criticise someone elses punctuation then at least learn how to correctly use ellipses.

Yaaaaaawwwwwnnnnnnn!........

alicante claret · Post by **alicante claret** » Wed May 10, 2017 11:42 am

There can only be two serious questions, is there a financial advantage or potential points advantage?
The finance question is will it be better value developing existing ground or selling site and building new. Points advantage few teams have had successful initial move. Too risky for me. It is inevitable that existing facilities will change but I hope we stay at Turf Moor for many years to come.

IanMcL · Post by **IanMcL** » Wed May 10, 2017 12:24 pm

We should never lose the view of the Penniless and Cricket from the Longside! Our ground is big enough for Burnley.

hampsteadclaret · Post by **hampsteadclaret** » Wed May 10, 2017 12:37 pm

Of course we don't need to move - loads of good reasons for stopping, most of them mentioned on this thread...our historical/geographical base just off the town centre - the bus station is 10 minutes from the ground, and 2 railway stations are within easy reach...parking cars is a bit of a problem at any decent club, we don't have a massive local issue with that. There are about 20 pubs and clubs within 15 minutes of Turf Moor, we couldn't have that in an out-of-town stadium.

A relegation next season [if it happened], and then say ten years out of the PL would totally negate the so called 'need' for a new stadium, of say 30,000. Generally speaking our present capacity deals with most of our needs. I don't really go with the idea of trying to make us a 'bigger club'.
Burnley is not a big town, and there is not much money here..there never has been - we should not over-reach ourselves just because we are successful at present..it might not last. We have been so sensible financially in the last 7/8 years [clearing debt/Gawthorpe/transfers in and out/ground improvements]. I would like to see that continue. Just because we have plenty of money at present, with more to come, doesn't mean we should start chucking it around - let the other 'badly-managed' clubs do that.

We have sold out I think, about 3/4 times this season ...does our excellent home record this season suggest that the configuration of Turf Moor gives us a big advantage..? Yes.

As we have spent money on the Bob Lord [new offices, a proper Premier League shop etc]...great views over the top of it..then we should concentrate spending on the Cricket-field stand..it has been there for a good while, and has served it's purpose...there are limits to how many times we can tart it up a bit. Try and get a state-of-the-art 6,000 capacity stand there [without encroaching on the cricket club..is that possible?] Doing that, for me, is preferable to a 'soulless new build'.

Bin Ont Turf · Post by **Bin Ont Turf** » Wed May 10, 2017 12:46 pm

hampsteadclaret wrote: the bus station is 10 minutes from the ground,

That's surely including a swift one in the 110 club?

hampsteadclaret · Post by **hampsteadclaret** » Wed May 10, 2017 12:49 pm

- OK skip the swift one in the KSC and you can leg it in 8 minutes..

Vintage · Post by **Vintage** » Wed May 10, 2017 12:52 pm

Good post Hampstead. I never want us to leave Turf Moor.

Also,if feasible, a new roof for the BL stand and remove the pillars.

cutsy123 · Post by **cutsy123** » Wed May 10, 2017 12:56 pm

cricketfieldclarets wrote:On another post, it went off topic suggesting that a new stadium if we stayed up this season would be on the agenda for the board.

I am all for increasing our commercial revenues and improving on and off the field.

But investing in a new stadium would be the worse thing that could happen to our club. I would even be averse to replacing the CFS and Bob Lord until we legally had to.

We should look to improve the club wherever we can. The training complex is now a 21st century, state of the art facility. And I can understand why that would need such investment. Its the place the players primarily work. They probably spend 70 percent of their 'working' time there. Maybe more. Its a huge and appealing complex for future players and youth development.

But the stadium is the core identity of the club and the home of the fans. Its the heart of the community and the fact that its been there for 135 years is a good thing not a bad one!

We will never compete with the huge teams on our doorstep commercially, will never have the same level of global appeal and will never have the delusions of grandeur that our nearest rivals did by thinking United, Liverpool etc are our new rivals. But we can compete in our own way. Our stadium is like a 12th man. And when you look at commercial interests and football tourism we need to be different not the same. Make the most of our heritage. Our culture. Our location. Our difference. Make coming to Burnley different than going to Leicester, Middlesboro, Coventry, Derby, Swansea, Reading and their same ground, same 'experience' different colour seats.

If we go down a new stadium route it will rip the heart of the community from the town. A new, identikit stadium on the outskirts of town with park and ride schemes is not what this club has ever been about or should be about. If we were to build a new souleless, characterless stadium and then lose our place at the top, who is going to travel out of town to watch? Moving out of town makes it a different team for me in all but name.

We still pine for the longside. But imagine being relocated from where we are and where we always have been. It doesnt bare thinking about travelling to network 65 to the Bet365 in association with Oak Furnitureland, M65 Arena.

I hope the club continues to progress. I hope we continue to develop on and off the field. But I hope we never forget our roots or change our identity.

I love the fact that its old. That its tired. That its in the middle of terraced housing. That its next to old pubs and chippies. That it joins onto a cricket ground. That you can see it from the hills above town. That its closer to the canal than the bus and train station. That its near schools and workplaces. That away fans and teams hate it.

If the board are considering such a move, I hope they engage with the fans and the community and reconsider. Save the money. Invest it in the team and redeveloping the essentials at Turf Moor. Dont lose our identity. Its what makes the club special.

Its Burnley. Not Barcelona.

I love these long posts with unnecessary words used to sound bright

Key phrases such as "averse" "core identity" "grandeur" "identikit"

Dyched · Post by **Dyched** » Wed May 10, 2017 1:12 pm

So the board isn't looking at a a new stadium

Royboyclaret · Post by **Royboyclaret** » Wed May 10, 2017 1:13 pm

Seems to be a lot of posters preoccupied with the concept of 'moving'.

How far are Tottenham moving?

Bin Ont Turf · Post by **Bin Ont Turf** » Wed May 10, 2017 1:21 pm

Dyched wrote:So the board isn't looking at a a new stadium

No they aren't.

I'm hoping that Claret Tony changes the thread title so that a bit of spice can be added to this thread later on today.

iluva64 · Post by **iluva64** » Wed May 10, 2017 1:31 pm

What a stupid post particularly as its generated 63 responses and mine now 64

People have no idea of the cost of redevelopment particularly in an area such as Burnley. Its not what you call a prime housing site or anything else for that matter so no financial reason in relocation to a purpose built stadium.

I can see the Cricketfield stand being replaced, it is getting on for nearly 50years old and I could see the same for the BLS. The latter more problematic as it is restricted by Brunshaw Road therefore to increase its size may mean that you have to add another tier rather than making the stand physically larger. Could result viewing restrictions. Replace with another same size but no columns?

Lets see where we are this time next year

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Wed May 10, 2017 2:07 pm

RidgeClaret wrote:If we aren't then we should be - not a new stadium but redevelopment of Turf Moor.

The 2 older stands are looking really dated now and won't last forever. We have never been in a better position financially and are guaranteed at least ￡270m over 5 years even if we are relegated next season. So the business case for redevelopment now is very strong.

Whilst we would all like to see most the money spent on players that's not going to happen and we don't want to give a large slice to the tax man either.

It's obvious that the directors are not going to rebuild the BL having just spent money on a new club shop/offices etc so a new CF stand something along the lines of PNE's Shankly stand wouldn't be too expensive. It holds approx. 6,000 so would increase our capacity to around 25k which would be more than enough.

You can't save tax by building a new stand, because the cost of a new stand isn't tax deductible. It was Burnley who tried that on with the Bob Lord Stand - tried to make out it was plant, not a building - and got shot down.

Wile E Coyote · Post by **Wile E Coyote** » Wed May 10, 2017 2:55 pm

if a youngster was brought along to a new stadium, he would be brought up thinking it was THE place to be, all his memories would be from the new venue. None of us were around when Burnley began, but the bulk of the history is on Brunshaw road.
I can see why fans have an emotional tie with a place where their dad, grandad, great grandad, went to watch the games.
Feel sorry for west ham fans having to vacate upton park, gunners leaving highbury, looks like everton too will be moving from goodison park soon.
For Burnley though, there is no need to go anywhere.
Yes, redevelop if needs be, improve facilities and maybe rebuild the stands when appropriate, there isnt one valid reason why any other site should be seen as beneficial in Burnley. It can easily accomodate the support.

RidgeClaret · Post by **RidgeClaret** » Wed May 10, 2017 3:17 pm

[quote="dsr"]You can't save tax by building a new stand, because the cost of a new stand isn't tax deductible. It was Burnley who tried that on with the Bob Lord Stand - tried to make out it was plant, not a building - and got shot down.

You're right dsr construction costs are not tax deductable but once the stand comes into use it becomes a capital asset and can be depreciated thereby off setting tax liabilities.

Giftonsnoidea · Post by **Giftonsnoidea** » Wed May 10, 2017 3:18 pm

Hope we never leave the turf as out of town stadiums just don't work and the atmosphere is usually terrible. The stadium is in the perfect spot as is.

At some point in the next ten years if we remain a prem team, I would like to see a wrap around stand (with curved corner) from the BL to CF stand with the option of knocking down the other two stands at a later date to join everything up perfectly.

The view of the pitch from the James Hargreaves lower stand is terrible so we need to get the sight lines right for any new stands before we begin.....

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Wed May 10, 2017 3:19 pm

RidgeClaret wrote:You're right dsr construction costs are not tax deductable but once the stand comes into use it becomes a capital asset and can be depreciated thereby off setting tax liabilities.

No tax relief on depreciation, either. There is no tax relief on new buildings.

Chobulous · Post by **Chobulous** » Wed May 10, 2017 3:24 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:If you're going to criticise someone elses punctuation then at least learn how to correctly use ellipses.

Football related thread - know your limits

RidgeClaret · Post by **RidgeClaret** » Wed May 10, 2017 3:49 pm

"No tax relief on depreciation, either. There is no tax relief on new buildings"

Depreciation reduces profits therefore reducing tax liability. I know a well known pub chain who is allowed to depreciate buildings as they clearly have a limited useful life. A football stand is similar surely?

Anyway the UK tax system is too much off topic - I would still build a new CFS.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Wed May 10, 2017 3:59 pm

RidgeClaret wrote:"No tax relief on depreciation, either. There is no tax relief on new buildings"

Depreciation reduces profits therefore reducing tax liability. I know a well known pub chain who is allowed to depreciate buildings as they clearly have a limited useful life. A football stand is similar surely?

Anyway the UK tax system is too much off topic - I would still build a new CFS.

In the accounts, you depreciate buildings. In the ax computation, you add it back, because neither new buildings nor depreciation get tax relief. New plant and machinery gets tax relief via capital allowances, new buildings don't.

taio · Post by **taio** » Wed May 10, 2017 4:00 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:If you're going to criticise someone elses punctuation then at least learn how to correctly use ellipses.

If you're going to criticise someone else's punctuation then at least learn to use an apostrophe when showing possession.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Wed May 10, 2017 4:03 pm

Chobulous wrote:Football related thread - know your limits

Pretty sure it's about a building, but i reject your point regardless.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Wed May 10, 2017 4:06 pm

taio wrote:If you're going to criticise someone else's punctuation then at least learn to use an apostrophe when showing possession.

I don't criticise people's grammar. That's not what i was doing. I was calling him a hypocrite.

bob-the-scutter · Post by **bob-the-scutter** » Wed May 10, 2017 4:19 pm

8

Imploding Turtle wrote:I don't criticise people's grammar. That's not what i was doing. I was calling him a hypocrite.

Fu** me....are you still prattling on?
Do Yourself a favour, google the word "Sarcasm"

Right_winger · Post by **Right_winger** » Wed May 10, 2017 4:30 pm

We should just get a bowl stadium on the outskirts of town named after some dodgy pie manufacturer which will be plastered on the outside of the stadium in big neon lighting ( obviously spell checked by Imploding Turtle)

32,452 capacity would be perfect and a nice area for the prawn sandwich brigade.

Obviously there will be nice new plastic seating and video walls on each corner of the ground.

Whilst we are at it let's sort out the half time entertainment again as there won't be any safety concerns for parachuteists landing on the roof.

PutTheWheelieBinsOut · Post by **PutTheWheelieBinsOut** » Wed May 10, 2017 4:41 pm

Please, please, please can we forget about this ridiculous notion of adding another tier to the Bob Lord stand, it will never ever happen. For a start it be cheaper to knock it down and rebuild the whole stand, secondly it would never pass building regulations, thirdly even if it was possible it would look so silly.

SGr · Post by **SGr** » Wed May 10, 2017 4:44 pm

Absolutely agree, we shouldn't look to leave TM ever. Now the board has generally acted in interests of supporters up until now, so I trust them to respect these wishes. Second longest serving home in all 4 divisions. Let's keep it that way

mdd2 · Post by **mdd2** » Wed May 10, 2017 4:48 pm

The building of the CF and Martin Dobson stands was soon followed by decline on the pitch which apart from a promotion in around 1982 continued until 1987. We must not modernise the ground or relocate at the expense of the quality of the squad

Rick_Muller · Post by **Rick_Muller** » Wed May 10, 2017 5:14 pm

We could ask to host the Olympics or the Commonwealth games and get us a brand new stadium paid for by the taxpayers...

nah... Turf Moor is why I still love football, because it has the history associated with it. I've been to plastic bowl stadia (Reading; Southampton; Arsenal etc) and they have nothing compared to Turf Moor. I would welcome development though, starting with a new Cricket Field End Kop with safe standing should that be allowed; and I would consider the possibility of replacing the roof on Bob Lord (not raising it with more seats, that would obscure the view from the Longside) only to remove the pillars, and then finally filling in the corners should the capacity be required.

minnieclaret · Post by **minnieclaret** » Wed May 10, 2017 5:32 pm

could we not just put some shuttering up to keep the sun out of our eyes?
Some shuttering up to keep the wind out?
lower them bloody roofs to keep the noise in?
and fill in a corner at a time as demand calls for it.
A long term project financially possible not betting the ranch.

minnieclaret · Post by **minnieclaret** » Wed May 10, 2017 5:34 pm

PS this debate is similar to Triggers broom. There are 4 new stands since my first visit.

Healeywoodclaret · Post by **Healeywoodclaret** » Wed May 10, 2017 5:40 pm

I agree with everything the OP says.

Our fans would hate it but more importantly Turf Moor should stay exactly where it is from a local economy point of view. Okay we are mixing it with the big boys and as long as the big boys are coming to town along wits their fans and cash local business will benefit assuming they don't all arrive on a coach which stops directly outside the ground.

If we ever became as big as Liverpool we should buy some of the properties directly outside Turf Moor to expand or build upwards.

Newcastle Uniteds ground is still in the city centre and it works well for both home and away fans.

Turf Moor IS Burnley FC!

UTC

Healeywoodclaret · Post by **Healeywoodclaret** » Wed May 10, 2017 6:10 pm

SGr wrote:Absolutely agree, we shouldn't look to leave TM ever. Now the board has generally acted in interests of supporters up until now, so I trust them to respect these wishes. Second longest serving home in all 4 divisions. Let's keep it that way

That's interesting. Which ground is the longest serving home then? Anfield?

Spijed · Post by **Spijed** » Wed May 10, 2017 6:18 pm

Healeywoodclaret wrote:That's interesting. Which ground is the longest serving home then? Anfield?

Preston

Longside4evr · Post by **Longside4evr** » Wed May 10, 2017 6:34 pm

Healeywoodclaret wrote:That's interesting. Which ground is the longest serving home then? Anfield?

Notts County I would imagine

Wile E Coyote · Post by **Wile E Coyote** » Wed May 10, 2017 6:52 pm

at least we havent suffered the indignity of a name change ...yet.

york had that with the KIT KAT ARENA. what a disgrace.

BleedingClaret · Post by **BleedingClaret** » Wed May 10, 2017 6:55 pm

Turf Moor is sacred ground.

Walt · Post by **Walt** » Wed May 10, 2017 7:10 pm

Longside4evr wrote:Notts County I would imagine

I believe Spijed is right, there since 1881.

Wile E Coyote · Post by **Wile E Coyote** » Wed May 10, 2017 7:14 pm

burnley started out somewhere up near Briercliffe rd i think, when they went to brunshaw rd, they brought the old tin roof with them .

SGr · Post by **SGr** » Wed May 10, 2017 7:28 pm

Healeywoodclaret wrote:That's interesting. Which ground is the longest serving home then? Anfield?

Deepdale, as Spijed pointed out. I mean Preston themselves are proof the ground can be appropriately renovated to their needs without being rebuilt

Stan Tastic · Post by **Stan Tastic** » Wed May 10, 2017 8:39 pm

I've never liked The Bob Lord stand.

I think it's pathetic-looking for a club of our stature. The original plan was for an 8,000 capacity cantilever stand that curved into the Bee Hole End.

Now we're swimming in cash surely it's time to improve the look of the place.

cricketfieldclarets · Post by **cricketfieldclarets** » Wed May 10, 2017 9:24 pm

cutsy123 wrote:I love these long posts with unnecessary words used to sound bright

Key phrases such as "averse" "core identity" "grandeur" "identikit"

At least your spelling is coming on. You are almost coherent now.

Bin Ont Turf · Post by **Bin Ont Turf** » Wed May 10, 2017 9:33 pm

Turf Moor................

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9gK2fOq4MY" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Rick_Muller · Post by **Rick_Muller** » Wed May 10, 2017 10:13 pm

Wile E Coyote wrote:at least we havent suffered the indignity of a name change ...yet.

york had that with the KIT KAT ARENA. what a disgrace.

The only ground sponsorship should be with a supplier of quality grass and it shall be known as...

TURF MOOR

Dark Cloud · Post by **Dark Cloud** » Wed May 10, 2017 10:36 pm

The Turf definitely needs work, but moving HAS to be out of the question. That would be plain wrong imo. Get something done with the CFS and if all is still fine and dandy look at the BL. But under no circumstances go for anything other than a small increase in capacity or jeapordise spending on the team.