I wouldn't even say it was there home ground anymore, it belongs to the NFL and the plastics are allowed to borrow it every other Saturday.
I think you are showing so much insight regarding the building of new stadia. Arsenal were put back 10 years by the same folly and I sincerely hope my team has second thoughts. Being a latter day Nostradamus I foresee all the London clubs being owned by Thai & Chinese money within 5 years. Laundry anyone?
I'm glad you appreciate my insight. The problem is they build a ground to accommodate tourists not supporters. The Thai and Chinese investment is all about their addiction to gambling. Already we've seen accusations of corporate espionage, this is no longer about football. Spurs are not a Football Club anymore in it's own entity. They are just like a huge roulette wheel and one day the ball is going to spin off the table.
tbh, the game isn't what i fell in love with back in the 70s. I know plenty of supporters that don't have the same passion for the game as they did before. Paying players X thousand per week to do something most of us would do for free is frankly obscene.
Three out of four ain't bad. Having s new stadium allows the wealthy fans to subsidise the others. Having two uses for the stadium effectively halved the costs without hurting the fans at all.
I don't actually think this is true. The ground has the crowd closer to the pitch than any other. The South stand has no corporate layer so will be a wall of sound.
The value of the club in a sale is the sum of the expected future cash flows. So if the club can be sold at a profit that proves the stadium is not a drain on resources. Thats why your logic that the owners are in it only for the money is irrelevant. Anything that increases the value of the club must also improve the chance of success on the field. Of course if Arsenal had had the foresight to build a sensible multipurpose stadium then you'd already have an NFL franchise and we'd be ****ed.