Is your ground too big for you?

[The Gills PegLeg]

In terms of the future though brb, it's where we want our club to go which dictates what we must need. If we want to be a solid Championship club which should be our aspiration, then unfortunately Priestfield won't be the answer to sustain it at that level for serious amount of time. If you look over the past 5-7 years or so, most clubs that have had a 12,000 seater stadium or smaller don't often tend to stay in that league. Brighton could be argued but even they dived back into League One for a little while.

We all know that we have a fan base that could have 16,000 people each week because of the amount of people we've taken to the Wembley finals. Even when we're playing well or have a big game, Priestfield can soon become sold out. If we want these occassions on a more frequent basis, then a new stadium that is more attractive, more accessible by public transport or with car parking and that can generate more revenue is required. I don't think there is no doubting that.

 

[brb]

The Gills PegLeg - I understand what you are saying but just a scenario for you, if we had a 16,000 sell out each week, what class of background do you expect those supporters to have come from at the prices we charge, taking into consideration the social affluence of the Medway Towns, especially if we are predicting that would be a weekly basis, hence in turn mainly ST Holders. It's alright everyone giving the new ground a thumbs up for valid various reasons but what sort of social model within it are we expecting and how will the club ensure, we do not see what we see at Prem clubs, certain supporters being priced out of the game. Do you honestly believe the majority of the football supporting residents in Twydall and the surrounding area, could afford an ST for a new ground, let alone the old one. Let's not forget this is Mr Gillingham Chairman we are dealing with, meaning new ground means higher prices.

 

[gioblues]

brb Gills are about average on cost to watch a game on match day. I think only 5 or 6 clubs cheaper in league 1. Kids under 12 only £6.
Gills biggest problem is we have no history. Medway supporters are only interested in the prem. We have no real rivals, apart from Maidstone of the non league. If we could get to the prem the supporters will only be watching the Gills games to see the opposition. We could easily get 25,000 but how many would be real Gills fans and how many would we get when we start going down the leagues again.
So do we need a bigger stadium??????

 

[The Gills PegLeg]

The Gills PegLeg - I understand what you are saying but just a scenario for you, if we had a 16,000 sell out each week, what class of background do you expect those supporters to have come from at the prices we charge, taking into consideration the social affluence of the Medway Towns, especially if we are predicting that would be a weekly basis, hence in turn mainly ST Holders. It's alright everyone giving the new ground a thumbs up for valid various reasons but what sort of social model within it are we expecting and how will the club ensure, we do not see what we see at Prem clubs, certain supporters being priced out of the game. Do you honestly believe the majority of the football supporting residents in Twydall and the surrounding area, could afford an ST for a new ground, let alone the old one. Let's not forget this is Mr Gillingham Chairman we are dealing with, meaning new ground means higher prices.

I for one don't really think that will play a part, it would just mean fans like myself who don't (or in my case can't) get to many home games or more likely to creep out of the woodwork on a more frequent basis. As I've said previously I know a fair amount of people including non - Medway residents that would be willing to watch us play if it wasn't for the fact the Stadium wasn't in the middle of Gillingham itself. Now without meaning to offend anyone on here, but that part of the town isn't particularly attractive to go to if you don't live in Medway.

I mean probably the best example to counteract brb's argument is Man City. Yes ok there are new fans that have only started supporting them since they've got money, but the majority of Man City fans have been supporting them for years when they were at Maine Road. You ask mist Man City fans what were the best moments you had supporting them and they will say either when the won the Premier League from Man U or when they beat us in the play off final. Now if a much bigger team than us in Man City can keep a core group of fans, then I'm sure Gillingham will be ok.

Besides if they still allow alwaysright and grumpygit in every week so I don't know what you're worried about.

 

[BSG]

I am afraid the game you grew up with brb is long gone, football has become a business. The tribal nature of football is the 70s and 80s is long gone, the modern fan wants to be entertained rather than be tied to supporting a team based on geographical location. Football is no longer a working class man's pursuit; people want to bring there families (I know I do when Millie is old enough) and as the demographic changes the requirements need to change. People drive to football these days, they want to sit, the want clean an tidy grounds and they are willing to "shop around" to get it, which is the reason many Kent folk travel into the capital. To ignore this would be fatal for the club, the ground will eventually need to developed and/or moved the trick is in the timing

 

[brb]

Like all opinions i accept what you say BSG. But what right do people have to price some out of that entertainment for the pockets of the corporate elite. People have always been able to bring their families, unless you read the Malice, the only difference being is it now pampers to the Ted Baker over priced standards for want of better wording. As for wanting to sit, thousands have protested to the opposite and await legislation to install the right to stand and are still waiting for their voices to be heard. It's not just about the 70's and 80's it's about a century, until Sky 1992 appeared on the scene. Football survived for that century the high and lows, it didn't fall like a pack of cards in the years of On Digital. Be careful the giant created and what people wish, because one day it will go full circle and like the dinosaur i am, there is every possibility we will become extinct, that's the fatal that the greed of dreams can lead. 23 years of Sky now, every camera watching you, watching them like a George Orwell prediction, from racism to football violence we now have a corrupt FIFA based on that greed and control, supported by governments, like the Blair and Murdoch buddy brigade. Maggie Thatcher got her wish and it still haunts us from beyond the Wicked Witch of West's grave. People conform over decades because the new generations know no different, it don't make it right and maybe not make it wrong, it only becomes wrong when people believe only one perspective is the only alternative, because a Sky News or Sports Channel says so, like the shut up and sit down brigade, because the majority want a mirror image.

 

[BSG]

It is not as much my opinion but more my understanding of commercial reality. Don't forget that I grew up watching way before the invention of Sky and I look back with fondness to the days of terracing, probably with Rose tinted specs. But I fear we have already crossed the Rubicon with football now, the horse has well and truly bolted and I feel that many of brb generation have been left at the gate.

People do want football on demand nowerdays, and despite the thousands against seating, millions are happy to put there hand in their pockets to stump up for seats week in week out. It is not about driving the working man away from football, it is the simplest of commercial laws; supply and demand. Clubs wouldn't charge stupid prices if people weren't willing to pay stupid prices.

You are right when you say many don't know any better but that sadly is the nature of time. Things move on or they stagnate and die, I am pretty sure people had this discussion when football went pro.

Your opinions are valid brb but I think that they are akin to Canute trying to stop the tide...

 

[GeminiSwiftgfc]

Let's not forget the golden rule. He who has the gold makes the rules. This is as true now as it ever was. Long before Orwell stated the obvious.

You have to change with the times, evolve. If football was perfect in the past it would still be the same. Nothing is perfect unfortunately.

As BSG said it's all about timing.

 

[brb]

Let's not forget the golden rule. He who has the gold makes the rules. This is as true now as it ever was. Long before Orwell stated the obvious.

You have to change with the times, evolve. If football was perfect in the past it would still be the same. Nothing is perfect unfortunately.

As BSG said it's all about timing.

All that glitters is not gold is a well-known saying, meaning that not everything that looks precious or true turns out to be so. This can apply to people, places, or things that promise to be more than they really are.

 

[GeminiSwiftgfc]

Grass is always greener, he who dares wins etc etc etc we could go on forever. Truth is that you have to adapt to survive, it's not a question of is the ground to big but it should be is it fit for purpose? Could it be better? What will give the club the best chance to survive in the future? Our current ground is unlikely to give us the best chance. There are no guarantees either way but Priestfield is poorly located and a move away probably needed not only to survive but to have the possibility to thrive.

 

[itstimupnorth]

Late to the party, as usual.

Many issues.

1. Ground size & location - as I mentioned in a post last time this issue was raised it is perfectly possible to build a new ground with modest capacity (in our case I would suggest 12-15,000), and have the possibility to increase capacity designed in. From what I have seen the idea of the Beechings Cross site was as close to ideal as is possible these days inasmuch as it's still reasonably close to town and therefore readily accessible. We don't want a Bolton Wanderers situation - new ground next to a retail park and with decent motorway rail access, but about 5 miles away from Bolton centre. Sterile environment. There's something about having a football ground reasonably near a town centre, At our level - 3rd or 2nd tier at best realistically - we need to be able to offer customers (sorry brb, that IS what they are these days) more than just a trip to a football match.

2. Fan base (customers!) - some good points raised. Yes, we can take 35,000 to Wembley once every so often, so how much research has been done into why more of those 35,000 don't go to Priestfield even 15 times a season. Success on the pitch is certainly one reason. Non diehard supporters are more likely to watch a successful team - just look at the home gates in a single season when a team becomes more or less likely to be promoted / relegated - but there must be more to it than that. Cost is obviously a factor as well, and it's hard to get a balance of income / attendances. It's obviously better to get 10,000 people in at £10 a head than 5,000 at £20 a head because of better atmosphere and also add-on sales of programmes and refreshments, but under that model it's no good pricing at £10 a head if you still only get 5,000 or only a few more.

3. Finances - like it or not we are in an age where the top clubs get all the money. The FA might make noises about getting money further down the game, but football in England is now effectively controlled by the Premier League, even the England football team itself to a certain extent. In an ideal world I'd love to see a rule that each Premier League club has to pay to the FA a sum that is the same as the salary of their highest paid player, but realistically that's just a dream. Unless PS can find a wealthy backer we'll have to settle for organic growth, and on the basis that he has been trying for several years and the situation is broadly unchanged it would seem to me that there isn't a long queue of people with even half deep pockets in Middle East terms (lets fact it, probably something like £40m would take us a long way if it's sensibly spent) who are vying to invest in the club.

 

[brb]

itstimupnorth, excellent points as always and nothing in there that i could disagree with. Personally in my ideal world, which will never happen i would like to see a break-a-way from the Premier League. Whereas the Championship becomes our top tier and League Two becomes combined with the Conference as a North and South. Yes, I know everyone, I really am away with the fairies!

But that is how i feel about football these days, i just hate the political propaganda machine it has become to socially control people, with SKY being at the forefront of that. Don't get me wrong i'm no socialist but more let's say without political allegiance but if i were to be then it would be more Libertatianism but even that's not the true front of my beliefs.

Wealth is the problem here for me, yeah, yeah, i know socialist, not at all, I just think you have to look at the demographics of an area. A bit like AFC becoming MK Dons, you can imagine my disdain at that. If you price a seat at £21+ for adults in Medway then there are going to be people who cannot go week in week out and in some cases very rarely. Whereas like itstimupnorth has pointed re charging £10, in my opinion, you fill those empty seats over two games instead of one. Spreading the available disposable income to best value.

We all know what's going to happen if we go to a new ground, the costs will be hiked. I'm struggling to afford £21 let alone any more and i consider myself better advantaged than most financially.

You can paint all the excuses under the sun, but Mr Scally needs to prove he can fill our current stadium with incentives for the demographics i mention, before even considering a new ground in my opinion. Do i want plastics, armchair fans etc, NO. There are plenty of alternatives for them to go support other teams, I'm happy with my League One, League Two football, leave our club alone.

This is not a no to a new stadium, it's about thinking through how we don't make the same mistakes as many other new build grounds we have visited.

 

[gioblues]

I am sorry brb but you are really stuck in the seventies,Were you one of the directors in the late seventies when Gills so nearly went up under Gerry Summers but thought we could not compete in the old second division and were glad when we kept just failing to go up.
I had previously said do we need a new ground and was not sure if it was needed,but i have ambitions and dreams that Gills can do a Bournmouth and play again in the championship and reach the prem. Even one season in the prem could keep Gills going for 3 or 4 seasons
So yes i would like a bigger stadium but only if we can afford it and not go into too much debt. Beechings cross sounds like a good option.Moving out of Gillingham is a no way option and i would rather stay at Priestfield.
.You blame tv money killing the game but without it i think most clubs would be in a worse state with poor facilities .The average footballer in the lower leagues will still need to get a job when there careers finish.You say it is expensive to watch Gills and yes if you have a family it is but how much do supporters from Medway spent when they watch London clubs. At least £80 to £100 per game including travel food and ticket. How much do they spent on a night out, £50 minimum.

.

 

[brb]

I am sorry brb but you are really stuck in the seventies,Were you one of the directors in the late seventies when Gills so nearly went up under Gerry Summers but thought we could not compete in the old second division and were glad when we kept just failing to go up.
I had previously said do we need a new ground and was not sure if it was needed,but i have ambitions and dreams that Gills can do a Bournmouth and play again in the championship and reach the prem. Even one season in the prem could keep Gills going for 3 or 4 seasons
So yes i would like a bigger stadium but only if we can afford it and not go into too much debt. Beechings cross sounds like a good option.Moving out of Gillingham is a no way option and i would rather stay at Priestfield.
.You blame tv money killing the game but without it i think most clubs would be in a worse state with poor facilities .The average footballer in the lower leagues will still need to get a job when there careers finish.You say it is expensive to watch Gills and yes if you have a family it is but how much do supporters from Medway spent when they watch London clubs. At least £80 to £100 per game including travel food and ticket. How much do they spent on a night out, £50 minimum.

.

With respect gioblues, I don't think there was any need for the reference to the seventies just because i have an opinion that may be contrary to most.

My views are nothing to do with the seventies and are valid opinions regarding football this modern day. I never for once suggested it was better back in the 70's, 80's or any other decade other than to highlight era of changes, albeit tinged with nostalgia. So if I don't conform to opinion does it mean let's place him in a box.

I've opened a debate, not dismissed the new ground, just trying to give contrast of opinion, based on political, demographic, old ground and personal experience based over 40 years, along with taking into consideration most current new build stadium's.

I'm not sure that i actually blamed TV money for killing the game albeit i have not discussed player greed in this topic yet. My main highlight with Sky in this debate has so far kept to political agenda's and control. Take a read of The Establishment, it gives some reference to part views of mine.

As for spending £80-£100 per game in London and £50 on night out, not everyone is fortunate enough to have that financial choice in their life let alone a football game, this whole point that seems to get overlooked. Football was never meant to be like going to the retailers, it was meant to be affordable for all, highlighting the increased changes between the rich and the poor...http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/11/world-cup-helicopters-streets-sao-paulo

Please continue the debate, it at least has added some life to our board.

 

[alwaysright]

brb
It is interesting to note (in a different, recent thread) that you praise Peterborough's ground - following its' recent redevelopment. I too can give it similar praise.
I believe that the capacity of the ground is now a shade under 15000 which is sufficient for a L1 side ( and probably for a Championship side of the 'stature' of Peterborough.

However, I note that their admission price for away adults is £26 ( £23 if purchased before matchday ). This is a lot more than £15 for the BMS or if you want cover, about £20.
If GFC were to build a new stadium at Beechings Cross, I would expect our admission prices to rise to similar proportions as Peterbrough. I know that this will make you more sad and against the idea - because 'more' people will be 'priced out' of watching live football - but as has been stated by myself and others, modern entertainment has 'evolved'c- with greater demands on comfort.
I know you do not particularly like the EPL, but most of the clubs achieve near on 100% capacity -- despite their inflated prices. Whilst a lot of these people will be STHs, there will be a substantial number who will be 'casual' fans ( rather like most of the 35-40,000 we take to Wembley ). Where I live there are a large number of restaurants - all thriving - BUT - not everybody can afford to eat out every day - in the same way that not everybody can afford to go to live matches every week. People are choosing differently how to spend their disposable income. GFC need to be able to attract more of that income.

With the level of expected comfort etc that is now expected when we spend our disposable money, we need to provide the right venue, capable of hosting a variety of entertainments for all the family - so that we can encourage more of the 'casual' fans to spend their money with GFC - with the hope that some of that money could be for watching Gillingham football. ...... For an example if the stadium had any of or all of the following = a gym & indoor & outdoor sports complex, bowling alley, social club, restaurant, it could provide pricing for 'merely' watching Gills football based on discounts for use of the other facilities. We'll NEVER do that at Priestfield.

If you remember the Orient game (1-5) the ale in the Coach & Horse tasted alright - but the ambience was one of the worst I've encountered for a long while - some of the ambience at Priestfield is not the best.

 

[brb]

alwaysright, i praised the Posh ground as per that individual topic, you would have noted for vicinity and standing not for any other aspect ie pricing. As for near on 100% capacity and your words inflated prices, my words have been added to this above, re social class and how football is no longer available for all but been modified for middle class tastes. So they can sit there in their Ted Baker gear reading a novel rather than supporting the team vocally in club colour's. Ok, I over exaggerate this time but i expect you get my point tongue in cheek.

ps, yes, i remember the Coach and Horses well LOL

 

[alwaysright]

brb
I too am passionate (opinionated if you wish to say), on certain subjects close to my heart. I applaud your stand. I actually support your stand - but I am pragmatic enough to know that with the changes in our social activities, I do not believe that being able to afford to watch live football - or indeed the effort involved, is as 'important' in the lives of the current generation as it was years ago.
I realise that there will be a small number of people who will 'lose out' by being priced out of attending football matches, - but I think that these numbers are relatively 'insignificant' enough as not to concern football clubs - all the time there are people willing to pay the price. clubs will keep on raising the price. The greater majority of the public have changed their leisure habits. Many people cannot devote the volume of time that is involved in 'physically' going to live matches. Modern families with working mums want some time together - and choose to go to the shops, garden centre etc 'together' - and a compromise by spending 'only' 90 minutes in front of a TV as being less 'selfish' for the football supporter in the family ( and cheaper as well ).

 

[gioblues]

brb
You say Gills is expensive to watch £16 bms £21 for rain end ,but non league it costs £15 to watch a game minimum. You cannot make tickets cheaper all season. Scally does do special deals during the season but only adds extra 1000-2000 people so not enough to keep it at those prices all year. At the end of the day if Gills do well attendances go up, if they play bigger clubs away support goes up and attracts a few extra Gills fans.
So again the question is Do We need a bigger stadium?????

 

[brb]

Some good counter response's above.

gioblues, just one minor point i would like to add that there is or was a campaign to say twenty is plenty, albeit this was for travelling supporters, but this did and correct me if my knowledge is wrong (not researched) includes Premier League clubs.

I'm sure a season or two back it was said of one Premier League club, that it could let every fan in for free from TV income and still not be financially any worse off. Now i know that would be an impossible scenario to manage but I use it to highlight the ability to keep pricing down, more difficult for Gills accepted and i would be the last person to be a critic of Chairman Scally but it does highlight the greed in the top tier.

I think an ST works out at about £14 a game/early bird (alwaysright please feel free to correct me), so if we get a new stadium with near capacity can we expect to pay £14 per game based on the increased revenue. It's alright i already know the answer lol

 

[alwaysright]

brb
- further to my post No.37

You talk about Class.
We are all working class. Modern working people (despite austerity) do have more disposable income than previous generations - AND - as aforementioned - the modern generation of workers choose to spend that disposable income in a different way to previous generations - AND - occasionally they will spend it on football.

There are more social activities available to the public. We cannot afford to participate in all of them. We make choices and prioritise - and in some cases we cannot place our attendance at football matches as highly as we like - because we also want to spend money on different pleasures - of which previous generations of the working class could not afford.

We live in a consumer society - where we want more - and bigger and better. ( I bet you don't watch TV on a 14" portable black and white set ! I expect you have a fridge, a freezer, washing machine etc ( which previous generations of working class people could not afford). The lifestyle choices we now make means that football is not 'important enough' to spend our money ahead of other things in our lives.

Football is a business - just like the shops in our High Streets. Why should it have a political conscience if the customer cannot afford the product - we don't have the same expectation of other 'retailers'

Having said everything I have written - I understand your 'individual' perspective. Would you have the same 'passionate' point of view that the working class is being priced out of going to the pub every night - now choosing to have a drink at home - with friends - with cheap alcohol bought from the supermarket - without needing to drive - without the fear of trouble with drunks - getting drunk without getting into trouble (other than from her indoors) etc etc..
== We've all got our pet subjects - I respect yours, even if I can see things from a different angle.