New stadium update...

[tomasjj]

Has no one picked up that in the summer the stadium completion went back one year to 2010, and has now gone back to 2011?

I saw that yesterday.

It seems they missed the point.... Parry said we were still on track to get it completed for 2011....when it used to be 2010....

[desertscouser]

I saw that yesterday.

It seems they missed the point.... Parry said we were still on track to get it completed for 2011....when it used to be 2010....

I wanted to put my fist through the screen when I read that yesterday.

[paulcooper4]

I wanted to put my fist through the screen when I read that yesterday.

do it fella, do it

[dom9]

I saw that yesterday.

It seems they missed the point.... Parry said we were still on track to get it completed for 2011....when it used to be 2010....

I remember the days when they wanted to get it completed in time for the city of culture stuff in 2008.

[tomasjj]

I wanted to put my fist through the screen when I read that yesterday.

The cheek on Parry to talk about still within the timelines....then say to be completed in 2011.

It seems he has become slimy now the last years, and intentionally deceitful.

[Tom]

The problem is that if we are taking on the debt as is being suggested then any extra income from the increased compacity will go on servicing that, and not be spent on the team......we'll be back to square one

[Scratch]

The problem is that if we are taking on the debt as is being suggested then any extra income from the increased compacity will go on servicing that, and not be spent on the team......we'll be back to square one

How so? Surely if they'd found another method of financing the stadium, they'd have taken a significant chunk of the extra income to pay it back? The repayments would be the smae, no matter how they've financed it, so just as much would be used on player purchases.

Doesn't matter where the debt is, it still has to be repaid, and those repayments were always going to come from club profits generated in part by the increased revenue the new stadium will generate.

[sonsofthedesert]

The problem is that if we are taking on the debt as is being suggested then any extra income from the increased compacity will go on servicing that, and not be spent on the team......we'll be back to square one

If they build a cheaper stadium as they plan and it holds 70,000 ultimatly then some of the increased revenue will g to servicing the debt and some will go towards team building. They would not bother if it only paid the debt as there is no benefit. By the sounds of it though if we built the £500m stadium then all extra revenue would be eaten up by the loan.
We shuld all wait and see what happens according to the echo the new design will be chosen in January so not long to wait.

[Rich]

End of the day all this arguing is pointless, everybody has a budget, it just so happens that we're going to be building a stadium in a period where it's very expensive to do so, therefore, while you could argue that the "super-duper" design should never have been considered, what makes absolute sense is to make a stadium which satisfies demand, maximises revenue, yet is affordable to the club.

[Venton]

End of the day all this arguing is pointless, everybody has a budget, it just so happens that we're going to be building a stadium in a period where it's very expensive to do so, therefore, while you could argue that the "super-duper" design should never have been considered, what makes absolute sense is to make a stadium which satisfies demand, maximises revenue, yet is affordable to the club.

Is the right answer.

[bobbyfallon]

End of the day all this arguing is pointless, everybody has a budget, it just so happens that we're going to be building a stadium in a period where it's very expensive to do so, therefore, while you could argue that the "super-duper" design should never have been considered, what makes absolute sense is to make a stadium which satisfies demand, maximises revenue, yet is affordable to the club.

you have not slagged parry our owners or any player -------- and put forward a reasoned answer.

this type of realism is not permitted and totally uncalled 4.

[sonsofthedesert]

From the post

The revised design submitted by HKS is believed to be only slightly dissimilar to the futuristic design which caused such excitement in the summer and AFL’s effort is understood to be a great improvement on their original effort

[Rich]

you have not slagged parry our owners or any player -------- and put forward a reasoned answer.

this type of realism is not permitted and totally uncalled 4.

Yes, sorry about that, SACK Ian Cotton, that's what I say.

[bobbyfallon]

Yes, sorry about that, SACK Ian Cotton, that's what I say.

thats more like it

[AFII]

This is almost the level our incomes and profit should be with our new stadium and better sponsorship deals...

United spent heavily in the summer, but the manager will ask the Glazers to loosen the purse strings again next month. It helps that United are preparing to announce record turnover for the financial year ending June 30. David Gill, the chief executive, predicted this year that United would achieve “dramatic growth” and the club are expected to announce record revenue of more than £200 million and profits of at least £60 million, with the Glazers enjoying significant increases in the club’s match-day and commercial revenue as they move towards their ambitious target of profits of £108.9 million by 2011.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/spo...cle3066015.ece

Then our debts won't be any problem at all.