Guest scotzine Posted January 6, 2008 Share Posted January 6, 2008 big businesses come in now and give clubs the funds to increase the size of their stadium in return for selling the rights to the ground for a certain number of years. Wigan - JJB Stadium; Arsenal - Emirates Stadium - there have also been other stadiums in the world where stands have been funded by Nike, Audi, BMW etc etc. Its part n parcel with footie now and I wouldnt be surprised if in the next few years stands or stadiums in scotland are renamed for a few years to raise funds for the teams. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest jshields Posted January 6, 2008 Share Posted January 6, 2008 Do you think if these plans go ahead for a 70000 seater making ibrox the largest sporting venue in scotland it could be used for other events like oncerts etc for raising cash for the club? Because hampden and old trafford must rake in alot of cash from their concerts. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest scotzine Posted January 6, 2008 Share Posted January 6, 2008 I doubt the stadium will be upgraded to 70,000 as the only times it will be full are for Celtic-Rangers matches and then European matches. A 70,000 seater stadium in the SPL is overboard now - maybe in the 1930s when crowds were 100,000 for both glasgow side teams then aye definately but not now. 60,000 would be a better size as they would still manage to fill this but not 70,000 as rangers will not want a stadium that looks half empty on match days. As for the commonwealth games opinions- rangers are not expanding their stadium to 70,000 because the commonwealth games as they are only hosting the Rugby 7s tournament. Celtic park is not expanding their stadium to over 70,000 if they expand it at all (with help or not from glasgow city council) just for the opening ceremony. The clubs have the right to veto the councils decisions as they are not council owned properties. Celtic will stay the same unless the board think it a wise move to upgrade if they continue to reach the last 16 of Champions League and Rangers will not upgrade to over 60,000 because David Murray does not want to see a half empty stadium on SPL match days and plus its not economically viable. Look how much Hampden cost for what 55,000 seats??? the club has to fork out for 20,000 additional seats roughly and at a price that will be higher than what Hampden contractors charged for same amount of seats. You have to take into consideration - strengthening the foundations, the closing down on stands on match days (thereby losing money) as well as the costs of labour, equipment and the materials to build it. Can Rangers actually afford to do this without releasing another share issue? Do you think Murray would actually finance it out of his own pocket especially after the recent reports eminating from the media that he was wanting out? The only feasible option is for a business outwith Rangers to come in and provide the funds to build the new stand(s) and then they will want something in return - renaming of the stand/stadium. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wija 0 Posted January 6, 2008 Share Posted January 6, 2008 I think Rangers would be keen due to the fact that since Uefa have said that the CL and Uefa cup finals will only go to the big stadia - 70,000 + then we would be hard to ignore if we have it. If we can also keep the 5* then we would have to be in line in the next 5 years due to Uefa wanting to rotate the countries that hold it. But is it a cloak and dagger sell of by SDM? Sell out the Ibrox name to the highest bidder. I just hope that any buyer is contracted in to ensure the stability and the survival and continuation of building of the club as a football entity, no ifs no buts! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnyk 158 Posted January 6, 2008 Share Posted January 6, 2008 60,000 would be a better size as they would still manage to fill this but not 70,000 as rangers will not want a stadium that looks half empty on match days. how does a 70,000 stadium with 60,000 fans in it look half empty :devil: 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted January 6, 2008 Share Posted January 6, 2008 Hmmm, i know someone selling a flat in Copland road ... investment opportunity? I would think so. Certainly not a bad idea. Only problem is getting tenants if you are letting it out. I might look myself..... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gribz 743 Posted January 7, 2008 Share Posted January 7, 2008 The re-naming thing wouldnt actually bother me. Id prefer it to be Ibrox for a number of reasons but its been a success with Arsenal. There home was Highbury for over 100 years and were sad to see it go but things move on. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gisabeer 409 Posted January 7, 2008 Share Posted January 7, 2008 one thing about david murray is that he has made money all his life, and lots of it too. if this venture comes to fruition then i believe it will be a success. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted January 7, 2008 Share Posted January 7, 2008 The leak of this is not a story of concrete plans, it's a case of scenario planning and the preliminaries of looking into all the alternatives. They will look at a load of different ways of expanding, and see which ones are the more economically viable. That will be from lowering the pitch to a full rebuild and everything in between. It's just modelling all the scenarios and seeing which is best. How many fans Ibrox should accommodate is a good question. 70,000 seats would presumably be far more expensive than 60,000 so would the extra revenue from some games be worth it? What would the average gate be at different capacities? There are a lot of questions that need to be answered. 70k may seem too big but would bring in 1M a game in the CL which could be 4M a year plus another 1.5M for the Celtic games, So even if rarely used to capacity it could still possibly bring in an extra 6 or 7M a year. If that was the forecast then a cost of say 30M for the extra 10k seats could be justified. However the most likely scenario may be a cheap option that expands the stadium to say 57K which only requires 6k more seats, most of which could probably be easily filled by new season ticket holders. 6k seats at �£500 each is 3M a year plus Euro and cup game income so say maybe 5-6M a year. So 25-30M to achieve this could make it feasible. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmck 117 Posted January 7, 2008 Share Posted January 7, 2008 calscot's back. yay. more posts to make chris' brain cry. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.