|
Post by oufcyellows on May 18, 2016 18:50:02 GMT
Go 4/5 rows less and all the way along would look better
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2016 19:09:38 GMT
Council have done nothing wrong. We need to work with them. That also applies at present to kassam Sorry OUFCY' nothing will convince me that Ka$$am is nothing more than a c**t.
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on May 18, 2016 19:12:29 GMT
That also applies at present to kassam Sorry OUFCY' nothing will convince me that Ka$$am is nothing more than a c**t. Quite possibly, still means we need to work with him. Rather have a c*nt working with us to help the club move forward, than a c*nt against us that can make it near on impossible for us to do so
|
|
|
Post by Junior on May 18, 2016 19:21:21 GMT
Council have done nothing wrong. We need to work with them. That also applies at present to kassam Kasssm has done plenty wrong when it comes to Oufc
|
|
|
Post by zakstratton on May 18, 2016 19:22:54 GMT
Judging by that Hertford picture it wouldn't stretch the whole length behind the goal, surley it would be dead centre behind the goal with remaining fence panels to enclose it? Or either separate 300 seats either side of the goal??
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on May 18, 2016 19:25:07 GMT
That also applies at present to kassam Kasssm has done plenty wrong when it comes to Oufc AT PRESENT - Meaning not years ago
|
|
|
Post by uptheus on May 18, 2016 19:37:10 GMT
Kasssm has done plenty wrong when it comes to Oufc AT PRESENT - Meaning not years ago Will never trust him, he only does things that benefits him.
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on May 18, 2016 19:39:41 GMT
AT PRESENT - Meaning not years ago Will never trust him, he only does things that benefits him. As do most business people, but we still need to work with him to get a deal that benefits him as well as us. Make a enemy of him and Oufc can't move forward
|
|
|
Post by yellows1 on May 18, 2016 20:03:01 GMT
Why don't they get just get plans in place to build a permanent 4th stand, should have been built on day one, the stadium ownership is really starting to become a bug bear for our football club, I'll NEVER be happy until Oxford United own their own ground!
|
|
|
Post by yellows1 on May 18, 2016 20:04:43 GMT
Will never trust him, he only does things that benefits him. As do most business people, but we still need to work with him to get a deal that benefits him as well as us. Make a enemy of him and Oufc can't move forward Yes we can, we need to force the issue and cut loose from this rubbish lease, even if it means ground sharing for a few years!
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on May 18, 2016 20:14:33 GMT
As do most business people, but we still need to work with him to get a deal that benefits him as well as us. Make a enemy of him and Oufc can't move forward Yes we can, we need to force the issue and cut loose from this rubbish lease, even if it means ground sharing for a few years! When we can negotiate a better lease or sort a deal that means buying the stadium or getting money to help in a move. ? Even if we went to watereaton we would still need a golden hand shake from fk to do it
|
|
|
Post by uptheus on May 18, 2016 20:24:09 GMT
Will never trust him, he only does things that benefits him. As do most business people, but we still need to work with him to get a deal that benefits him as well as us. Make a enemy of him and Oufc can't move forward Fully aware that we have to work with him, but not to our detriment. He owes is big time and needs us more than we need him.
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on May 18, 2016 20:25:32 GMT
As do most business people, but we still need to work with him to get a deal that benefits him as well as us. Make a enemy of him and Oufc can't move forward Fully aware that we have to work with him, but not to our detriment. He owes is big time and needs us more than we need him. Of course , still think that's more likely to be achievable on friendly terms than just normal ones.
|
|
|
Post by Gary Baldi on May 18, 2016 21:05:26 GMT
Crawley's away seating is marquee, same as Bristol Rovers. Placement will be key - I wouldn't want to be that accommodating to away fans considering what teams have to put up with at places like Gillingham.
|
|
|
Post by The Fence End on May 18, 2016 21:12:27 GMT
I guess the fence will remain because of the Chiltern Railways sponsorship but the temporary stand will be above it?
|
|
|
Post by itsoneofthem on May 18, 2016 23:24:57 GMT
My initial assumption was that away fans will continue to be put in the smallest current allocation of the north stand, allowing season tickets to be sold in the prime seats along the halfway line. Should there be a requirement for more than ~1100 away tickets then the temporary stand can be used rather than opening up further sections of the north stand. If a decent gating system was put in place then for such games away fans could access the north stand facilities, but when away requirements are smaller and when home demand is such, or even in general to provide some atmosphere, it could be used by home fans who then access the south stand facilities. That is of course if it's feasible and desirable to not build additional facilities for the stand.
Would there be any football league requirements to match the east stand ticket prices for the temporary stand, i.e. a couple of quid cheaper than the north stand, given that it is an equivalent view? If so, and the plan was to house away fans in the temporary stand initially, then it would result in a reduction in revenue for the first 600 away fans, or require an increase in east stand ticket prices to counter balance that.
There are definitely potential benefits, but if they are outweighed by FK tightening his grip on the ownership and tenancy situation, e.g. increasing rent or being granted permission for building as a biproduct, then I'd much rather we stick with the status quo for now. The only way we'll get to own our own stadium is if FK can develop where he wants as a direct result of us owning our ground. Letting him deveop in stages for trivial benefits such as this is just putting us in a weaker position.
|
|
|
Post by myles on May 19, 2016 5:30:57 GMT
How did the council "get in the way of it"? Taking so long with the regulations, planning etc. How do you know they took so long? As far as I can see no formal application was made. There's a number of parties involved here. At the very least, there's Oxford City Council as the planning authority and Oxfordshire County Council who have responsibility for issuing the safety certificate for the ground. As far as I can see, neither of those parties have done anything wrong. It may be that following the proper process meant that it would not have been possible to get a fourth stand up in time for the Wycombe game, but that's a very long way from it being either councils "fault".
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on May 19, 2016 5:42:39 GMT
U work for the council don't u
|
|
|
Post by myles on May 19, 2016 5:52:40 GMT
U work for the council don't u No, but I do sit on the Safety Advisory Group for the stadium and am aware the situation is much more complex than you're trying to make out.
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on May 19, 2016 7:05:24 GMT
Gbt implied it in the hurdles that could not be got over for the Wycombe game . I am aware it's complex, and I am aware that planning licences and such ain't all down to the same council. But people like Bob price are happy to lump all blame on kassam when all lot of it is down to them.
|
|
|
Post by myles on May 19, 2016 7:23:58 GMT
He didn't imply anything of the sort. He simply recognised that it takes time to get the relevant certification etc - more than the 10 days or so they had available to sort this out. Again, this is a long way from your claim that the council(s) "got in the way", i.e. were in some way to blame.
|
|
|
Post by saddletramp on May 19, 2016 7:53:37 GMT
Why don't they get just get plans in place to build a permanent 4th stand, should have been built on day one, the stadium ownership is really starting to become a bug bear for our football club, I'll NEVER be happy until Oxford United own their own ground! Never understood "till Oxford United own their own ground" ? IF we were to purchase the ground,surely DE would own the ground ? When FK was owner and chairman of OUFC,did Oxford United own the ground or FK ? Obviously FK,as he dumped the club and kept the ground. Man United dont own their own ground,the Glazers do. Liverpool dont own their own ground Fenwick sports do. Im not knocking your sentiments,until we get rid of FK,we will always have the monkey of the massive rent of our backs. But unless we have a Barcelona type scenario,where the fans own the club,we will never really own the ground.
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on May 19, 2016 8:00:16 GMT
He didn't imply anything of the sort. He simply recognised that it takes time to get the relevant certification etc - more than the 10 days or so they had available to sort this out. Again, this is a long way from your claim that the council(s) "got in the way", i.e. were in some way to blame. By using ie ur putting a play on my words. If the planning and certification takes longer than the time then needed and it's the council that issues them and dictates how long it takes, then by ur same logic it is the council that got in the way. Why is bob prices saying a rent increase is the only obstacle when de says he doesn't think it it and hasn't even met with kassam over it yet.
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on May 19, 2016 8:01:33 GMT
Why don't they get just get plans in place to build a permanent 4th stand, should have been built on day one, the stadium ownership is really starting to become a bug bear for our football club, I'll NEVER be happy until Oxford United own their own ground! Never understood "till Oxford United own their own ground" ? IF we were to purchase the ground,surely DE would own the ground ? When FK was owner and chairman of OUFC,did Oxford United own the ground or FK ? Obviously FK,as he dumped the club and kept the ground. Man United dont own their own ground,the Glazers do. Liverpool dont own their own ground Fenwick sports do. Im not knocking your sentiments,until we get rid of FK,we will always have the monkey of the massive rent of our backs. But unless we have a Barcelona type scenario,where the fans own the club,we will never really own the ground. Isn't that the idea though, that the stadium will go into some kind of trust that it's irrelevant who owns the club the stadium always stays with it
|
|
|
Post by yellowg on May 19, 2016 8:49:35 GMT
There could be a scenario or two next season where 13,100 seats could serve us well.
However, I see the 4th stand as an investment in the football side of things. The atmosphere could really improve. It will be a new experience on match day at the Kassam for fans, players etc.
I'm really quite excited. I think it shows good foresight by the club, and its a bit of a suck it and see scenario.
|
|
|
Post by ZeroTheHero on May 19, 2016 10:10:50 GMT
While I am nowhere near convinced that we will *need* a 'temporarily permanent' stand to cope with the hordes piling into the ground to see the likes of Bury, Southend, Fleetwood and Shrewsbury, I DO think that it will help to have something other than the fence at the far end (atmosphere, wind break etc!).
If it is a 600 seater and is assigned to the away fans (which is what it says in that Oxford Mail article), then surely that isn't going to be big enough for a few of the larger away followings to be housed in there exclusively - they are still going to have to have part of the North stand? So presumably we aren't going to be able to have season ticket holders in the far end of the North Stand, again decided by the segregation under the stand?
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on May 19, 2016 10:24:17 GMT
While I am nowhere near convinced that we will *need* a 'temporarily permanent' stand to cope with the hordes piling into the ground to see the likes of Bury, Southend, Fleetwood and Shrewsbury, I DO think that it will help to have something other than the fence at the far end (atmosphere, wind break etc!). If it is a 600 seater and is assigned to the away fans (which is what it says in that Oxford Mail article), then surely that isn't going to be big enough for a few of the larger away followings to be housed in there exclusively - they are still going to have to have part of the North stand? So presumably we aren't going to be able to have season ticket holders in the far end of the North Stand, again decided by the segregation under the stand? Correct, but it does mean we can sell season tickets for all games in the two centre best blocks
|
|
|
Post by myles on May 19, 2016 10:31:39 GMT
By using ie ur putting a play on my words. Not putting a play on your words at all. In the context, it appeared that you were suggesting that the council(s) were in some way to blame for the stand not happening at the Wycombe game. The very phrase "got in the way of.." implies a deliberate blocking action. If that's not what you were saying, it's an odd choice of phrase.
|
|
|
Post by myles on May 19, 2016 10:36:06 GMT
Never understood "till Oxford United own their own ground" ? IF we were to purchase the ground,surely DE would own the ground ? When FK was owner and chairman of OUFC,did Oxford United own the ground or FK ? Obviously FK,as he dumped the club and kept the ground. Man United dont own their own ground,the Glazers do. Liverpool dont own their own ground Fenwick sports do. Im not knocking your sentiments,until we get rid of FK,we will always have the monkey of the massive rent of our backs. But unless we have a Barcelona type scenario,where the fans own the club,we will never really own the ground. Isn't that the idea though, that the stadium will go into some kind of trust that it's irrelevant who owns the club the stadium always stays with it Spot on. I'm in favour of the club NOT owning the ground, provided it is held by some sort of trust where the primary focus is use of the asset for the benefit of the club rather than as a commercial vehicle.
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on May 19, 2016 10:36:38 GMT
By using ie ur putting a play on my words. Not putting a play on your words at all. In the context, it appeared that you were suggesting that the council(s) were in some way to blame for the stand not happening at the Wycombe game. The very phrase "got in the way of.." implies a deliberate blocking action. If that's not what you were saying, it's an odd choice of phrase. But it was the councils times scales on passing these things ! Depends how u wanna look at it. Same as having to apply for permission every time we wanted to use an outside bar, rather than just granting permission for when we wanted it. The councils have stood on oxfords way for decades, right back to looking for the new stadium. Now they seem to want to jump on the success. After all they can shut off the city centre and organise a parade at a days notice when it suits them
|
|