New Stadium or Revamp Old Trafford

Would you rather a new stadium or rebuild Old Trafford?

  • New stadium

    Votes: 670 49.9%
  • Rebuild Old Trafford

    Votes: 673 50.1%

  • Total voters
    1,343

stevoc

Full Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2011
Messages
20,358
The more I look at the size of the footprint of other top stadiums the more I think there is nowhere near enough room there, and building over the railway would add only a sliver. The only way is to take over the container yards and build there, which would mean finding another site for them. If we did they might be happy to move, it must be a pretty crap location for moving containers in and out by road. If not I say move, anything else and our ground would be second class, and we shouldn't settle for that.
The club hold a lease over that land they don't actually own it I believe. It's a long lease for I think another 30+ years, but even if the yard could be moved would United then be in a situation where they potentially don't own the land where some or all the the stadium is situated. Not to mention who knows how much it would cost to buy land somewhere else and move that transit terminal, if that's even possible.
 

golden_blunder

Site admin. Manchester United fan
Staff
Joined
Jun 1, 2000
Messages
120,016
Location
Dublin, Ireland
Low? 2 billion quid ? Not just low but “incredibly low”?

Spurs, despite being in London spent 1bn.

2bn quid would make it the second most expensive stadium on the planet behind only the SoFi.
Exactly.

the national children’s hospital in Dublin is costing around 2billion and the size of the thing is enormous - in one of the most expensive cities in the world

i don’t get why it will cost 2bn to build a stadium. I’d love to see a breakdown. Does that take into account buying more land rather than leases? Does it factor in revamping the surrounding area?
 

711

Verified Bird Expert
Scout
Joined
Dec 10, 2007
Messages
24,255
Location
Don't sign old players and cast offs
The club hold a lease over that land they don't actually own it I believe. It's a long lease for I think another 30+ years, but even if the yard could be moved would United then be in a situation where they potentially don't own the land where some or all the the stadium is situated. Not to mention who knows how much it would cost to buy land somewhere else and move that transit terminal, if that's even possible.
Moving the ground to a new site altogether or buying land for the yards, both where they are now and where they might go, would obviously cost a lot of money. So would rebuilding in the existing position. I don't know how either would be financed, but other clubs have moved and others have rebuilt, either is technically possible. Interestingly such land deals are very much Peel Holding's forte, they do transform entire districts.
 

decorativeed

Full Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2009
Messages
12,389
Location
Tameside
Low? 2 billion quid ? Not just low but “incredibly low”?

Spurs, despite being in London spent 1bn.

2bn quid would make it the second most expensive stadium on the planet behind only the SoFi.
Spurs started building their ground in 2016. It opened in 2019. I don't know if you've noticed, but things have become slightly more expensive since then. The price of steel is pretty much double what it was in 2016. Labour costs are far more. And we won't have spades in the ground for years yet.
 

Herman Toothrot

Full Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2021
Messages
1,756
Exactly.

the national children’s hospital in Dublin is costing around 2billion and the size of the thing is enormous - in one of the most expensive cities in the world

i don’t get why it will cost 2bn to build a stadium. I’d love to see a breakdown. Does that take into account buying more land rather than leases? Does it factor in revamping the surrounding area?
Manchester is the 12th most expensive city in the world to build in, Dublin not too far behind in 19th place.
 
Joined
Jul 31, 2015
Messages
22,902
Location
Somewhere out there
The price of steel is pretty much double what it was in 2016. Labour costs are far more. And we won't have spades in the ground for years yet.


The price of steel has actually been on a steady decline since the pandemic, not surprisingly as interest rates have stopped many from building and there’s not the same demand.
140 ish in 2017, 170 ish now.

Labour is more post Brexit, but not “far more”, up around 4% although interest rates and less construction demand are likely to reign those in somewhat also.

It’ll be more expensive than Spurs of course, but as posted above, London is the most expensive city in the World to build in, and 2 billion quid in an incredible sum of money.
 
Last edited:

decorativeed

Full Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2009
Messages
12,389
Location
Tameside


The price of steel has actually been on a steady decline since the pandemic, not surprisingly as interest rates have stopped many from building and there’s not the same demand.
140 ish in 2017, 170 ish now.
I suppose the only way we'll know who was right will be when work is complete, but I think the £2bn estimate is going to end up being way off the mark.

The new Wembley stadium originally was supposed to have cost £475m. It eventually cost £798m and that project started 20 years ago. If we want this to truly be the Wembley of the North, it's going to be expensive.
 

Spoony

The People's President
Joined
Oct 27, 2001
Messages
63,185
Location
Leve Palestina.


The price of steel has actually been on a steady decline since the pandemic, not surprisingly as interest rates have stopped many from building and there’s not the same demand.
140 ish in 2017, 170 ish now.

Labour is more post Brexit, but not “far more”, up around 4% although interest rates and less construction demand are likely to reign those in somewhat also.

It’ll be more expensive than Spurs of course, but as posted above, London is the most expensive city in the World to build in, and 2 billion quid in an incredible sum of money.

Yeah so 2b should cover it. 30k seats for an additional billion quid.