Sir Jim Ratcliffe: I want to buy Manchester United | Will make a bid for the club [Telegraph]

[phelans shorts]

If any of the past 10 years are to go by, then we will need every help we can to bring people to Old Trafford...as we haven't been winning much.

You just have to see what Dallas Cowboys have done. Not won a Super bowl since 1995, but yet still are amongst the the top brass, due to the help of all their "fan experience."

So why do the majority of games still sell out without an in built Brewdog*spits* bar

 

[red thru&thru]

So why do the majority of games still sell out without an in built Brewdog*spits* bar

When did I say it doesn't?

 

[Spoony]

So why do the majority of games still sell out without an in built Brewdog*spits* bar

I think we'd sell out for at least another decade, regardless.

 

[phelans shorts]

When did I say it doesn't?

The post I quoted. “We will need every help to bring people” and that we should follow somebody totally irrelevant because they still sell out without success, you know, like we already do.

 

[crossy1686]

If any of the past 10 years are to go by, then we will need every help we can to bring people to Old Trafford...as we haven't been winning much.

You just have to see what Dallas Cowboys have done. Not won a Super bowl since 1995, but yet still are amongst the the top brass, due to the help of all their "fan experience."

And that isn't something we should be looking to emulate. There is zero value in being top brass in any department other than winning titles. Can you really envisage anyone being happy if we're still sat here in 25 years time talking about how we've not won anything but at least we've got an arcade and a few restaurants at OT?

The American's are a different breed anyway, they don't give a shit if their team just up and moves to another state, they all just follow the best team in the league or the biggest name. Football has it's share of fair weather fans but its more tribal than American football will ever be.

 

[red thru&thru]

The post I quoted. “We will need every help to bring people” and that we should follow somebody totally irrelevant because they still sell out without success, you know, like we already do.

This was a follow up from Crossy's post about being successful.

 

[red thru&thru]

And that isn't something we should be looking to emulate. There is zero value in being top brass in any department other than winning titles. Can you really envisage anyone being happy if we're still sat here in 25 years time talking about how we've not won anything but at least we've got an arcade and a few restaurants at OT?

The American's are a different breed anyway, they don't give a shit if their team just up and moves to another state, they all just follow the best team in the league or the biggest name. Football has it's share of fair weather fans but its more tribal than American football will ever be.

We are still relevant today partly due to the work off the pitch that has been done, not just because of our success. As a poster pointed out above, we still sell out, even though we haven't been winning.

The customer experience is more than just entering to sit on the seats to watch the game. We have to look at all aspects, especially if we want continue to be self sustainable, without the years of on field success.

 

[Coops73]

Didn't Tottenham's stadium cost £1b?

I think they had to buy land and acquire/move various businesses around the ground, in fact I believe it was a garage owned opposite the ground mysteriously burned down after they refused to sell or relocate, so whether any of this is in that costing I’m not sure.

United I believe own all the land around old Trafford including the fright yard, though I could be wrong about that, but with the price of raw materials going up in price 1bn doesn’t sound too fanciful and it would probably cost more but it’s all guess work really.

The Glazers have probably been given a ball park figure and gone feck that, see ya!

 

[Plant0x84]

Given the Glazers main business is retail property, seems odd this is a route they haven’t followed. There again retail is a tough sector at the minute, plenty of empty units across the country and a big empty shopping mall next to the stadium isn’t going to be a draw to anybody.
Improvements to the stadium definitely need to be football centric to improve the fan experience.

 

[Hal9000]

People will continue to come to OT if we continue to win things, having a big stadium with a shopping mall next door doesn’t guarantee anything, and building additional amenities doesn’t bring any more fans in the door on match day. The draw is the team, it’s the players, it’s the football and the atmosphere, not pumpkin spice lattes.

The new generation interact with United via socials, not getting ripped off with a £25 burger.

Fulham just built a swimming pool on top of one of their stands to attract people, United don’t have to do any of that, it’s Manchester United.

A lot of reasons why you see clubs build in and around the stadium is not just for "fan experience " the revenue's contribute to the club and FFP, ground rents and revenue driven from business on land owned by the club can be counted towards ffp and thus allowing more of transfer spend. It also helps the clubs financials overall.

You look at Spurs who have numerous hotels, restaurants, businesses.. they even have a walk on the stadium's roof experience... All that money goes into the clubs coffers, even on match days and from people who don't attend football.

Sticking, shops, restaurants, hotels and whatever else around the stadium is making it a 365v days a year, 7 days a week destination for lot more than your average fan. At the moment we got a lot of land that's only used for roughly 30 days a year.

 

[red thru&thru]

A lot of reasons why you see clubs build in and around the stadium is not just for "fan experience " the revenue's contribute to the club and FFP, ground rents and revenue driven from business on land owned by the club can be counted towards ffp and thus allowing more of transfer spend. It also helps the clubs financials overall.

You look at Spurs who have numerous hotels, restaurants, businesses.. they even have a walk on the stadium's roof experience... All that money goes into the clubs coffers, even on match days and from people who don't attend football.

Sticking, shops, restaurants, hotels and whatever else around the stadium is making it a 365v days a year, 7 days a week destination for lot more than your average fan. At the moment we got a lot of land that's only used for roughly 30 days a year.

Put more eloquently than I could.

Having read an article on The Atheltic, any new buyer will look at potential future financial growth, and this is one way of doing it.

 

[Bert_]

Given the Glazers main business is retail property, seems odd this is a route they haven’t followed. There again retail is a tough sector at the minute, plenty of empty units across the country and a big empty shopping mall next to the stadium isn’t going to be a draw to anybody.
Improvements to the stadium definitely need to be football centric to improve the fan experience.

Glazers business is buying up property and established businesses using credit. Credit is no longer cheap and so readily available so they are cashing out as they don't know any other way to operate.

 

[crossy1686]

A lot of reasons why you see clubs build in and around the stadium is not just for "fan experience " the revenue's contribute to the club and FFP, ground rents and revenue driven from business on land owned by the club can be counted towards ffp and thus allowing more of transfer spend. It also helps the clubs financials overall.

You look at Spurs who have numerous hotels, restaurants, businesses.. they even have a walk on the stadium's roof experience... All that money goes into the clubs coffers, even on match days and from people who don't attend football.

Sticking, shops, restaurants, hotels and whatever else around the stadium is making it a 365v days a year, 7 days a week destination for lot more than your average fan. At the moment we got a lot of land that's only used for roughly 30 days a year.

And you feel that the City centre, Trafford Centre, Salford Quays, Hotel Football etc will have absolutely no problem with any of that? They're just going to allow that level of construction on their doorstep without lobbying?

 

[golden_blunder]

And you feel that the City centre, Trafford Centre, Salford Quays, Hotel Football etc will have absolutely no problem with any of that? They're just going to allow that level of construction on their doorstep without lobbying?

I honestly don’t see the gripe they’d have with it, surely the extra footfall would have an impact in their areas too, certainly hotel football would be busier you’d expect.

I’d like to see the whole area regenerated and have a Manchester United campus, in a mix of stores and local business units

this should be used to get closer to the community after the glazer era of not even talking to the community

 

[crossy1686]

I honestly don’t see the gripe they’d have with it, surely the extra footfall would have an impact in their areas too, certainly hotel football would be busier you’d expect.

I’d like to see the whole area regenerated and have a Manchester United campus, in a mix of stores and local business units

this should be used to get closer to the community after the glazer era of not even talking to the community

Personally if they're going to do anything I want the reserve/training/academy pitch built right next to OT so you can see the whole path and development of a players career. If they want people to stick around more than 2 hours and buy stuff then give them a reason to go and watch the reserves or first team train also.

 

[golden_blunder]

Personally if they're going to do anything I want the reserve/training/academy pitch built right next to OT so you can see the whole path and development of a players career. If they want people to stick around more than 2 hours and buy stuff then give them a reason to go and watch the reserves or first team train also.

I’m sure people would love that but it’s not going to done on a first team home match schedule

 

[golden_blunder]

The surrounding area is a bit run down no? Hence I’d like to see them address the stadium project as part of a community project

 

[Gazza]

San Siro is going to get knocked down and Camp Nou is having a £1.3b redevelopment. I took some folk on the OT tour and it looked tired and dated
behind the scenes and all. Sure the stadium looks ad hoc but that's just aesthetics, the main issue is tread and seat sizes. If you want to be the best you have to make a statement otherwise leave alone and fade away.

This is just nonsense tbf

 

[fergies coat]

Trigger's broom?

Don't move Old Trafford is got too much history apparently.

This old stadium has had 14 new stands and 20 new pitches. How the hell can it be the same stadium then? Here's a picture of it what more Proof do you want.

 

[red thru&thru]

Don't move Old Trafford is got too much history apparently.

This old stadium has had 14 new stands and 20 new pitches. How the hell can it be the same stadium then? Here's a picture of it what more Proof do you want.

As long as we don't leave the site, such as Arsenal did, I'd be happy with a new stadium. Let the "new" stadium create it's own history. Plus, there would be so many references to the past, I'd say it'd be difficult to lose its aura.

 

[Nou_Camp99]

More chance of us playing on the moon for a year.

Where else would we play? City won't be sharing.

I think it could well be an option. ST holders in the north would have to be offered a grace year.

 

[Bert_]

Where else would we play? City won't be sharing.

I think it could well be an option. ST holders in the north would have to be offered a grace year.

City's ground is owned by the council so it would be an option.

Playing at Wembley is a ridiculous suggestion. Has the same vibe of American teams moving cities at will.

 

[fergies coat]

Where else would we play? City won't be sharing.

I think it could well be an option. ST holders in the north would have to be offered a grace year.

A Manchester club will not be playing in London for a year. No chance is that ever going to happen. It isn't the NFL.

 

[JB7]

Where else would we play? City won't be sharing.

I think it could well be an option. ST holders in the north would have to be offered a grace year.

It's not an option. We aren't relocating 200 miles away for a whole year, the precedent it would set is both dangerous and completely wrong.

 

[hp88]

Where else would we play? City won't be sharing.

I think it could well be an option. ST holders in the north would have to be offered a grace year.

We really haven't got anywhere to play unless we but some goal post up on the cricket pitch and paint some lines... I think this has been one of the blockers for the Glazers doing any kind of major development work as would need to shut off sections of the ground which means loss of match day revenue and those feckers love revenue.

 

[phelans shorts]

I honestly don’t see the gripe they’d have with it, surely the extra footfall would have an impact in their areas too, certainly hotel football would be busier you’d expect.

I’d like to see the whole area regenerated and have a Manchester United campus, in a mix of stores and local business units

this should be used to get closer to the community after the glazer era of not even talking to the community

The likes of the Lowry Centre would go out of business pretty damn quick if this kind of thing was set up, never mind all the bars paying top dollar for rent around Media City. There’d be massive complaints from several quarters, all of the losses to the cricket club too from their main income drivers of hotels and corporate spaces. This is just the stuff in a 10/15 walk of the ground!

Where else would we play? City won't be sharing.

I think it could well be an option. ST holders in the north would have to be offered a grace year.

I mean the obvious answer would be Everton’s new ground after it opens. Wembley would not even be considered, rightly.

 

[Nou_Camp99]

This is the issue. We can't redevelop the South Stand because of the railway lines. There isn't enough free land at the side of the current stadium either to build one next door whilst we play the last year in the older one.

The club would have to buy more land, most likely from the Freight terminal near the car parks.

 

[acnumber9]

Don't move Old Trafford is got too much history apparently.

This old stadium has had 14 new stands and 20 new pitches. How the hell can it be the same stadium then? Here's a picture of it what more Proof do you want.

Renovating an existing structure doesn’t make it new. It makes it renovated.

 

[sullydnl]

I was surprised how dated the stadium looked behind the scenes. The other problem is eventually we'll need to redevelop regardless and it'll only get more expensive. Better spending a £1b than double that a decade down the line.

This would be one of the issues with rennovation rather than a new stadium, I would think.

We already know to an extent what the future of sports stadiums is in the form of the planned integration of augmented reality, virtual reality, sensor technology, 4D cameras, new ticketing tech, facial recognition software, increased sustainability measures and (if they're allowed) a whole lot of data mining. And then on top of that the developments we can't currently predict that will inevitably emerge over a period of say 10-40 years.

There's bound to be a degree to which a rennovated stadium, limited by the practicalities of design, is less future-proofed than newer stadiums which can be built in anticipation of future developments.

Without knowing what flaws a rennovated stadium would carry versus a new stadium, it's hard to know to what extent you risk spending a fortune to rennovate it into something comparable to new stadiums only for those new stadiums to continue upgrading more efficiently beyond that over the following half-decade.

 

[Sushi Kagawa]

We have plenty of space to build a new stadium right next to the current one

 

[Nou_Camp99]

If the diagnosis is that a new stadium is required then what do we do? We have to play somewhere.

 

[FujiVice]

Where else would we play? City won't be sharing.

Shared one during the war. Where's your blitz spirit?

 

[Gavinb33]

Renovating an existing structure doesn’t make it new. It makes it renovated.

They didn't renovate the Stretford End or the Sir Bobby stand they were knocked all the way down and rebuilt fully

 

[red thru&thru]

As long as they keep it on the same site, I'm happy enough.

In regards to relocating, we should build the youth/women's stadium close by first and then move into that whilst the main stadium is being built/renovating, similar to what Real were doing.

 

[Hal9000]

And you feel that the City centre, Trafford Centre, Salford Quays, Hotel Football etc will have absolutely no problem with any of that? They're just going to allow that level of construction on their doorstep without lobbying?

That's a different matter isn't it.. let's not build something because competition may not like it? Or it takes business? Imagine what modern cities would look like it with this viewpoint...

 

[Spoony]

This would be one of the issues with rennovation rather than a new stadium, I would think.

We already know to an extent what the future of sports stadiums is in the form of the planned integration of augmented reality, virtual reality, sensor technology, 4D cameras, new ticketing tech, facial recognition software, increased sustainability measures and (if they're allowed) a whole lot of data mining. And then on top of that the developments we can't currently predict that will inevitably emerge over a period of say 10-40 years.

There's bound to be a degree to which a rennovated stadium, limited by the practicalities of design, is less future-proofed than newer stadiums which can be built in anticipation of future developments.

Without knowing what flaws a rennovated stadium would carry versus a new stadium, it's hard to know to what extent you risk spending a fortune to rennovate it into something comparable to new stadiums only for those new stadiums to continue upgrading more efficiently beyond that over the following half-decade.

You're advocating a new build than an extensive rebuild of Old Trafford, Sully?

 

[TheReligion]

Where else would we play? City won't be sharing.

I think it could well be an option. ST holders in the north would have to be offered a grace year.

Don’t be silly

 

[Regulus Arcturus Black]

Where else would we play? City won't be sharing.

They’d need to actually own the fecking stadium in order to decide that.
It’d be a decision taken out of their hands by the owners of the site & stadium.

 

[Gazza]

The idea that Man Utd will "fade away" without a new stadium is absolute looney tunes material. People just want something new and shiny and that's ok, but it's simply not the case that we need a new stadium in order to be successful.

 

[acnumber9]

They didn't renovate the Stretford End or the Sir Bobby stand they were knocked all the way down and rebuilt fully

They were added to the existing structure at the existing site. It’s renovation.