Case for a new stadium/Swansea comparison

[Gerryhatrick]

Many on here have made comments like 'we can't even fill LR so we don't need a new stadium' and similar drivel, so can anyone explain what is happening in remote Wales?

Liberty Stadium cost £27 million to build. Capacity is 20,500 which is the second smallest in the prem (we know the smallest, don't we). Last year they averaged 15,000 which was probably very slightly less than us. However, due to their marketing methods and price structure, Swans sold 16,000 ST's this year, and demand is so high, that they now plan on spending a further £15 million to increase the capacity by a further 10,000. So this would make it a 30,000 + stadium.

The team that finishes bottom this year is guarenteed £40 million (which co-incidently happens to be near the total cost of the swans stadium and expansion), and a further 750k for each place above bottom. Relegated teams get parachute payments to help with wages and costs to a value of around 90 million. Staying in the prem of course means another £40 mill minimum.

My point is, we have a self imposed limit due to our capacity, but we once got over 45,000 in the '70's. Nothing has changed at our stadium to encourage new fans or returning fans, so of course we will be stuck with the same limits. You can't just hope fans will turn up, it needs aggressive, marketing, and heavy proffessional promoting, and atractive football team. Swansea have discovered that if you provide excellent facilities the fans will come.

Either of us could finish bottom, and I just hope that our new owners invest in the infrastructure of our club and not just players, if it happens.

[Gerryhatrick]

To add, links for interesting reading

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberty_Stadium,_Swansea

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/footballnation/swansea-city-fc/2011/07/01/liberty-stadium-expansion-would-cost-15-milllion-huw-jenkins-91466-28979415/

[Dazzer1977]

Always said what the club should do is build a massive stadium and make it more affordable. If prices were more realistic then more people/families will come. Football is far too expensive and I am sure for a father of 2 matchdays must cost in excess of £100 and that probably don't include food and drinks. If only clubs would work on larger volumes rather trying to maximise the cost per head on the turnstile they would generate more revenue in the long term over a long period of time.

[Nodge70]

Reading did the same. Couldn't get close to selling out Elm Park (averaged 6k) - but trebled that in a brand new stadium with top notch facilities. Bingo. Not rocket science. Our problem is two fold.

1. We no longer own LR and would not benefit from any sale and 2. Limited local space and land prices in the area.

[W12_Ranger]

Many on here have made comments like 'we can't even fill LR so we don't need a new stadium' and similar drivel, so can anyone explain what is happening in remote Wales?

Liberty Stadium cost £27 million to build. Capacity is 20,500 which is the second smallest in the prem (we know the smallest, don't we). Last year they averaged 15,000 which was probably very slightly less than us. However, due to their marketing methods and price structure, Swans sold 16,000 ST's this year, and demand is so high, that they now plan on spending a further £15 million to increase the capacity by a further 10,000. So this would make it a 30,000 + stadium.

The team that finishes bottom this year is guarenteed £40 million (which co-incidently happens to be near the total cost of the swans stadium and expansion), and a further 750k for each place above bottom. Relegated teams get parachute payments to help with wages and costs to a value of around 90 million. Staying in the prem of course means another £40 mill minimum.

My point is, we have a self imposed limit due to our capacity, but we once got over 45,000 in the '70's. Nothing has changed at our stadium to encourage new fans or returning fans, so of course we will be stuck with the same limits. You can't just hope fans will turn up, it needs aggressive, marketing, and heavy proffessional promoting, and atractive football team. Swansea have discovered that if you provide excellent facilities the fans will come.

Either of us could finish bottom, and I just hope that our new owners invest in the infrastructure of our club and not just players, if it happens.

That's the price of the penalty box in West London covered then....how much for the rest of the pitch and then the ground.....or we could move to a #### heap in Wales

[Gerryhatrick]

Reading did the same. Couldn't get close to selling out Elm Park (averaged 6k) - but trebled that in a brand new stadium with top notch facilities. Bingo. Not rocket science. Our problem is two fold.

1. We no longer own LR and would not benefit from any sale and 2. Limited local space and land prices in the area.

I thought we did still own LR, but that it is used as security on a loan? Maybe I'm out of touch.

True, limited space is an problem, but not impossible. Linford Christie stadium swop, Scrubbs seems to have loads of land around it, BBC site. Also, can we not go down 10-15 metres at LR so that overall height isn't an issue?

[silvercue]

Always said what the club should do is build a massive stadium and make it more affordable. If prices were more realistic then more people/families will come. Football is far too expensive and I am sure for a father of 2 matchdays must cost in excess of £100 and that probably don't include food and drinks. If only clubs would work on larger volumes rather trying to maximise the cost per head on the turnstile they would generate more revenue in the long term over a long period of time.

That is the age old argument - but listen to people that run football clubs and they will tell you it is false.

Simon Jordon articulated very well why it makes more money to put prices up and have less people, than to have a full house at a cheap entry price. The fact that people spend fortunes more in he stadium is simply not tue. The majority spend nothing and of those that do most people don't spend a lot and most of what they do buy comes at the cost of purchase and handling, so the profit is not that great.

Do you think the business men running football clubs don't take a look at the most simple of accounting and maths?

Also a stadium in/near London would cost £200 million. You would need massive local and authority investment which we simply won't get.

Even when we were cheap we had the same crowds. They have been the same for 20 years with the exception of a single season.

Why do people on here insist on saying we would get 40k if we had a bigger stadium. We wouldn't.

[W12_Ranger]

That is the age old argument - but listen to people that run football clubs and they will tell you it is false.

Simon Jordon articulated very well why it makes more money to put prices up and have less people, than to have a full house at a cheap entry price. The fact that people spend fortunes more in he stadium is simply not tue. The majority spend nothing and of those that do most people don't spend a lot and most of what they do buy comes at the cost of purchase and handling, so the profit is not that great.

Do you think the business men running football clubs don't take a look at the most simple of accounting and maths?

Also a stadium in/near London would cost £200 million. You would need massive local and authority investment which we simply won't get.

Even when we were cheap we had the same crowds. They have been the same for 20 years with the exception of a single season.

Why do people on here insist on saying we would get 40k if we had a bigger stadium. We wouldn't.

Well said

[CroydonCaptainJack]

Totally agree with silvercue. The simplistic allocation of the £40m I see on this and other board makes me laugh as well. Conveniently forgetting the existing annual losses plus the debt.

[80sCasual]

Reading did the same. Couldn't get close to selling out Elm Park (averaged 6k) - but trebled that in a brand new stadium with top notch facilities. Bingo. Not rocket science. Our problem is two fold.

1. We no longer own LR and would not benefit from any sale and 2. Limited local space and land prices in the area.

Same as with Brighton, couldn't even fill their ground when at the Withdean stadium, now look at them in their new place at Falmer.

[camembert]

"so can anyone explain what is happening in remote Wales"

There's your answer right there.

Cheap land for said stadium.

Captive audience as there is no-one else to support.

[qprjames]

We desperatley need a new ground. Personally I'd have no problem moving out of w12 to cheaper land if it meant we could have a new ground. Also a much bigger potential fanbase if we were to move down the a40.

[casuallyqpr]

We are in london though,in the whole of wales there is only four proper teams to chose from so easier to gain support. Brighton dont have much competition same with reading to an extent.

We would be like coventry, end of the day forget what the stadium is like/prices/whos in charge etc we couldnt sell out our first game in the premier league after 15 years. We are a small team with a small fanbase.

[W12_Ranger]

We desperatley need a new ground. Personally I'd have no problem moving out of w12 to cheaper land if it meant we could have a new ground. Also a much bigger potential fanbase if we were to move down the a40.

Off course you don't, you're a teenager probably have no proper attachment to the area and want to boast to you're mates about our shiny new stadium.

[Olly]

"so can anyone explain what is happening in remote Wales"

There's your answer right there.

Cheap land for said stadium.

Captive audience as there is no-one else to support.

And built with sheep labour too.