It's listed as the "gross capacity" on the factsheet jojojo posted above. It seems to refer to the capacity without things like press/executive boxes, so the 100k figure is the truer one.
New Stadium | 100k Stadium to be built - design visualisation released
- Thread starter FootyGirl88
- Start date
-
Nik (@Rood) and Imran (@Annihilate Now!) discuss United's fantastic win away against Athletic Club in the semi-final of the Europa League.
They also pick out the positives of United's 4-3 loss away at Brentford, and Nik reviews a day out at Old Trafford watching Manchester United Women qualify for the Champions League.
Ah interesting cheers.
What sticks out to me is the amount of hospitality seats. Over fifteen thousand seats being allocated to hospitality seating feels like a very high number to me, or is that a normal amount? I don't think I've ever really paid attention to that, so maybe it's not actually that much?
The Amazon Firestick Theatre of Streams.
I thought that extra was staff
New stadium name: Traffordus Prime
I think it looks amazing. Hope the team and staff don't have to settle for 2 minute noodles in the near future for financing this thing.
I think it looks amazing. Hope the team and staff don't have to settle for 2 minute noodles in the near future for financing this thing.
That proposed new stadium looks ridiculous. Looks like a circus tent combined with star wars.
Does the Stade de France not have under soil heating?
I really hope we are massively priotising the playing surface. Madrid are having some issues with theirs and that’s got to be part of the criteria for ‘best football stadium in the world’.
Clubs are trying to increase match by match spend so are increasingly putting out hospitality packages. What constitutes as hospitality is becoming increasingly dubious though. I think we'll even start to see "hospitality deluxe" which will essentially be the old hospitality standard repackaged so they can justify charging someone £100 for a free pie and a pint alongside their ticket and saying that's hospitality.
With the new ground, I'd genuinely be in favour of more (thinking like 20,000) if that extra money was used to reduce the other 80,000 or so "ordinary" tickets.
The problem is the Glazers/Ratcliffe and other owners have a very different logic when it comes to pricing structure. They probably think "that hospitality ticket is £200 which means that if you scaled down, we can charge that "ordinary" fan £66.
Wheres the funds to build coming from?
Last edited:
Euromillions is £150m tonight. Hopefully the club bought a ticket.
I'm not sure about this. It'll put financial limitations on squad investment for a long time. Not obvious to me that it's a better solution for the club than upgrading OT. As for the supposed benefits for the city I'd take those claims with a huge grain of salt. If I was a UK taxpayer, no way I'd support putting billions of public money into it.
That's the spirit!
You can see it on this picture showing the cross section. Ground level is at the level of the top of the first tier of the new Stretford End.
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2025/mar/18/new-manchester-united-stadium-jim-ratcliffe-glazers
The derision some journos have for this club is quite crazy. He makes some salient points but starting the article comparing the stadium to Roy Keane’s tackle on Haaland just sets up the whole article as a bad faith argument.
The derision some journos have for this club is quite crazy. He makes some salient points but starting the article comparing the stadium to Roy Keane’s tackle on Haaland just sets up the whole article as a bad faith argument.
It reminds me of the Ivory Tower from The Neverending Story. it even has the observation deck.
If we pull this off, it will go down as one of the most iconic stadiums ever.
If we pull this off, it will go down as one of the most iconic stadiums ever.
I think that is an excellent article.
That article perfectly captures the culture of jealousy and victimisation from the left. The Guardian is a stain on the UK press.
It reminds me of the Ivory Tower from The Neverending Story. it even has the observation deck.
If we pull this off, it will go down as one of the most iconic stadiums ever.
Good call. I knew I'd seen it before.It reminds me of the Ivory Tower from The Neverending Story. it even has the observation deck.
If we pull this off, it will go down as one of the most iconic stadiums ever.
Never read anything on United from Liew. He hates us. I doubt he has ever written a positive article about us.
If we upgrade OT as it is now, it's 75% of the cost of a new build stadium, and then in 25 years (or less) it'll need doing again. I can see the financial sense in a new stadium, as you can build in future proofing from the get go meaning ongoing maintenance is a lot less.
Is he a united correspondent or just another jurno who united ruined his childhood?
Almost zero positives in the article about a new stadium, there must be some fecking positives!
Are there?
Not according to the journalist.
The Guardian is excellent, but that specific article is shite.
Also, the bolded part is ridiculous.
I was hoping you could list a few of the positives to be honest because I'm not seeing many at present.
*if* the gov gets onboard with the wider regeneration, how can you not see a positive?
Which clubs in the world would not want a modern, state of the art stadium apart from clubs who recently got one? If the design is polarising (and it's really not to my taste personally) who really cares if it gets built?
You can see it on this picture showing the cross section. Ground level is at the level of the top of the first tier of the new Stretford End.
Maybe it's perspective but it looks like those beams are going to be obstructing a lot of views at the top of the stand? Or is that just for the model and they won't exist on the competed stadium?
Edit. On inspection I think I'm being an idiot and it's just to get the model to hold together. Otherwise there are random beams where seats should be.
I was thinking more how much pigeon shit we're going to get from roosting on that bar
Economically, it's much better for the club, it's more guaranteed money than the champions league money.
For the fans, for me as someone who visits the UK once per year to attend a match, our stadium looks disgusting compared with other big clubs stadiums. It's not even a good experience for the children.
For the region, I can't speak for the locals, they know more about it, but my guess it would be positive for the regeneration of the area.
Psychologically, I think it's positive in some circumstances to change your place to move forward and progress.
I think it's better in the long term to just build a new stadium. It won't cost much more but will future proof the club for the next 100 years.
The current stadium also has accessibility problems as it's hemmed in by the freight terminal, train line, canal etc...
Moving it NW a bit means it can be accessed on all sides. So much easier to get 100,000 people in and out for games, concerts, etc...
Tax payers money spent on housing and public transport is well spent. It's only 15 minutes from Manchester by public transport so is ideal for new housing.
Also I think the government will only fund the infrastructure and rezone the land and then private developers will fund the housing.
The stadium will be privately financed so it doesn't cost the public a penny.
I do think it's a complex project though with lots of unknown variables so it might never happen according to the vision of Ineos.
We might get a watered down version in 10 years.
Very normal reaction.
If it works out United get a modern stadium that can seat more people simultaneously. The club get a stadium that can add a lot of extra revenue earning hospitality seats without reducing capacity for ordinary fans.
Manchester gets more passenger train capacity both for local use and for inter-city links. The north west region gets an expansion in freight train capacity without reducing speeds or capacity on passenger lines.
If it works really well, Manchester gets a batch of new housing and some new jobs. The club get a money making machine.
It's a bit of a student politics take from Liew. Developments and regeneration rarely happens without massive private investment. Is Old Trafford to remain a wasteland within one of the fastest developing cities in Europe to avoid the possibility of private profits? There's a lot to dig into when it comes to development in Manchester over the last decade, especially Sir Richard Leese's famous decision to sell off half the city on the cheap to the profit of investors from Abu Dhabi. An interesting time to start having a strong opinion about it.
The bolded word is key - clubs. Ask the supporters of Spurs and Arsenal where they would sooner watch football week in, week out. Everton are probably wanting the new stadium but let's be fair that's a large part because their stadium does need to be bigger and Goodison is quite literally falling down.
I'm seeing a huge stadium that supporters haven't asked for, which us supporters will ultimately then be forced to pay for.
I'm seeing 25,000 extra seats, when the reality is for 90% of matches you can't give tickets away.
I'm seeing an iconic structure knocked down to be replaced with a fecking circus tent.
Economically, it's better to not spend £2bn in the first place if that's where we're going.
Old Trafford does not "look disgusting", that is genuinely one of the most ridiculous things I've ever seen on this forum. I'm intrigued as to which "big club stadiums" you're comparing it to to be honest; presumably Real Madrid? As for "the children", if United win, it's a great experience, that's where they're there for, the football, I know it's a massively forgotten element nowadays in the building of a fecking football stadium.
The area does need money spending on it. But that's on successive failures through different governments and should be done regardless of whether the football club has a new toy or not.
United don't *need* a new stadium to increase capacity and an increase in capacity isn't even needed save for 2/3 games a season. The freight stuff, similar to regeneration, should and could be done regardless of a new stadium.
I don't dispute the potential for a new stadium to be a money-making machine. I take issue with the fact that we as supporters will have to fund something we did not ask for.
Underground VIP/Staff carpark? I do hope they do try encourage public transport to the ground as been stuck in match day traffic far too many times and I rarely go. Although hope to take my son when this is built and he's old enough.
What do you mean by this? Do we not sell out every league game?