|
New Stand
May 1, 2017 14:46:40 GMT
via mobile
Post by willk on May 1, 2017 14:46:40 GMT
Thanks ballboy, I'd love to ask that question but can't be there-im just a bit worried that all these stadium plans are all very well and good but all supporters of any club actually want to see is an entertaining and exciting brand on the pitch. I wouldn't actually mind finishing outside the play offs as long as my Saturday/Tuesday's had been enjoyable.
|
|
|
Post by ballboy on May 1, 2017 14:56:29 GMT
We all want the same willk but the off field facilities do not impact what is happening on the field. Agree that the players need to perform to make it enjoyable and a settled squad will help. I think that anything in top 10 would be acceptable with a push for promotion/play offs the following season.
|
|
|
Post by taylov on May 1, 2017 15:18:56 GMT
How many additional seats do you have in mind ? 500 new seats is the plan I believe (on the west side). I think the plan is to get these in place in 2017. From what i hear from Kenny about the level of bookings for the new hostility packages we are going to need at least 500 more seats. The level of sales seems to have come as a surprise.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2017 15:42:39 GMT
We all want the same willk but the off field facilities do not impact what is happening on the field. Agree that the players need to perform to make it enjoyable and a settled squad will help. I think that anything in top 10 would be acceptable with a push for promotion/play offs the following season. The off field facilities DO have an impact on what is happening on the filed. SD has done a superb job of building sustainability off the field, which will lead to increased revenue for the club which in turn will lead to more money for players/salaries etc. Ask Darlington, Hungerford, Poole or Wealdstone if off field activities affect what happens on the pitch!
|
|
|
New Stand
May 1, 2017 15:46:58 GMT
via mobile
Post by willk on May 1, 2017 15:46:58 GMT
On the same tack ask Sunderland, middlesborough, Swansea, Rotherham Coventry etc if shiny stadiums and corporate facilities mean a damn thing.
|
|
|
Post by back4more on May 1, 2017 16:08:58 GMT
Martin, we could all club together and buy one of those hostility packages for willk. By the way willk, I don't know about the other examples you mention but I do happen to hear anything to do with Coventry City because I did work in that town for a short period. Their moves from Highfield Road to the Ricoh Arena to Northampton Town and back to the Ricoh have been an example of how it can all go wrong and their playing fortunes have obviously suffered massively. Their situation is very different though as neither the club nor its owners have owned their ground for many years as I understand it. The main example I can think of where a club has made progress on and off the pitch, other than Man City who have been able to lease what was the Manchester Commonwealth Games Stadium, is Brighton. I still can't understand though how they managed to be given the green light to build their ground where it dominates a previously rural view in the South Downs National Park. Good luck to them but I found it strange that was allowed when Everton were arbitrarily refused permission on very spurious grounds, by the government of the time, to build a new stadium and retail centre in what was a derelict Kirkby Town Centre.
|
|
|
Post by ballboy on May 1, 2017 16:21:35 GMT
We all want the same willk but the off field facilities do not impact what is happening on the field. Agree that the players need to perform to make it enjoyable and a settled squad will help. I think that anything in top 10 would be acceptable with a push for promotion/play offs the following season. The off field facilities DO have an impact on what is happening on the filed. SD has done a superb job of building sustainability off the field, which will lead to increased revenue for the club which in turn will lead to more money for players/salaries etc. Ask Darlington, Hungerford, Poole or Wealdstone if off field activities affect what happens on the pitch! Mark - I accept that SD wants the club to be self sustainable but i don't think he has is a lack of money for players/salaries etc. We are very fortunate to have such a chairman which of course the others clubs mentioned don't.
|
|
|
Post by upthespitfires on May 1, 2017 18:37:48 GMT
Thanks ballboy, I'd love to ask that question but can't be there-im just a bit worried that all these stadium plans are all very well and good but all supporters of any club actually want to see is an entertaining and exciting brand on the pitch. I wouldn't actually mind finishing outside the play offs as long as my Saturday/Tuesday's had been enjoyable. Have to agree about where we finish next season Willk. We've only had three seasons in this league (which is so hard to get out of anyway), there are clubs far better than us, and I think the whole expectation of gaining promotion within x number of years just puts too much pressure on with, perhaps, unrealistic expectations. The ambition SD has for the club is incredibly admirable and he is striving to improve it both on and off the pitch. We'll have a new management and coaching team next season and, hopefully, once they have a squad they want to work with and who they feel will bring success, we will be rewarded with positive performances and results. Even if it takes us another two or three seasons to gain promotion to the football league, it will still be a fantastic achievement. Whatever happens, I will continue to support the team and management, and will try and make a few more away days than the ten I've done this season. Strangely enough North Ferriby and Solihull were two of the best trips I've done which just goes to show that Eastleigh FC is more than football 👍
|
|
|
Post by unknownquantity on May 1, 2017 18:53:44 GMT
I think that some clubs are in a position where they have to relocate because they have outgrown their current ground with Southampton and The Dell being an example of this. I would think most clubs would want to be at a ground where they can expand and have an opportunity to raise funds to support the club.
It must be difficult for clubs who find themselves in a position where no matter how well they perform on the pitch there is no prospect of progress. I think that new stadiums are often built for the longer term and even when in the shorter term results on the field are not as good as they could still be a lot of potential at the club.
Southampton suffered two relegations after moving to their new stadium and I think they would have found it much harder to return to soccer's top flight if they had been relegated whilst still playing at The Dell.
A few years ago Eastleigh did not even have terracing and apart from the fact that we would have never got promoted I wonder what our crowds would have been like if that had remained the case.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2017 19:10:06 GMT
The off field facilities DO have an impact on what is happening on the filed. SD has done a superb job of building sustainability off the field, which will lead to increased revenue for the club which in turn will lead to more money for players/salaries etc. Ask Darlington, Hungerford, Poole or Wealdstone if off field activities affect what happens on the pitch! Mark - I accept that SD wants the club to be self sustainable but i don't think he has is a lack of money for players/salaries etc. We are very fortunate to have such a chairman which of course the others clubs mentioned don't. I know SD has the money but even he is not a bottomless pit and i'm sure he as much as I would be much happier if we were self sustaining and he didn't have to reach into his own pocket every season. Its that whole, "Give a man a fish v teaching a man to fish" situation.
|
|
|
Post by taylov on May 1, 2017 19:43:10 GMT
"A few years ago Eastleigh did not even have terracing and apart from the fact that we would have never got promoted I wonder what our crowds would have been like if that had remained the case."
As recently as 6 seasons ago (2010/11) when we had a successful season in the South and finished 8th we had NO 4-figure home gates. Our best were 877 vs Woking on the 23rd March and 822 against Havant on 3rd January. We averaged 600-700 for most of our better seasons in the South until SD arrived.
When we got a freak 2200+ crowd for the league game with AFC Wimbledon, over half the crowd couldn't see much of the game. Who would have thought that day that 2200 would have been our average in the National League and that we would have welcomed over 5,000 for a cup tie at the Lane, or taken 1,500 to Brentford. Better facilities mean bigger crowds, more income for the club and, hopefully, an improvement on the pitch (in time).
|
|
|
Post by hantslondoner on May 3, 2017 10:12:30 GMT
|
|
|
Post by back4more on May 3, 2017 10:46:33 GMT
£35000 seems expensive for crockery and cutlery for a 120 seater. And five chefs sounds like a lot. The new restaurant looks like a very brave investment though and the very best of luck to the club for a successful start with it.
|
|
|
Post by crazyhorse on May 3, 2017 12:29:17 GMT
Not sure if this can be answered here, but I heard a rumour that those with season tickets in the main blue stand will have to move to the new seated stand that is going to be built, so that those in hospitality can then be seated in the current main stand for the game. Can anyone shed any light on this?
|
|
|
Post by Bruce Forbes on May 3, 2017 13:02:22 GMT
Not sure if this can be answered here, but I heard a rumour that those with season tickets in the main blue stand will have to move to the new seated stand that is going to be built, so that those in hospitality can then be seated in the current main stand for the game. Can anyone shed any light on this? I sincerely hope that this is NOT the case.
|
|