Noticed on a few forums suggestions that Bates is planning to shut the South Stand next season, to keep police and steward costs down. Any thoughts on this taking place?
I could see it coming when they reopened the ESU. Haven't got the crowds for both, and the ESU tickets are more expensive. Surprised it hasn't already happened, tbh.
WJ - more likely he will close both: South and ESU. If we are only going to have average 17000-19000 attendances, Bates's philosophy has always been to make those who turn up pay more and more, rather than put strategies in place to double the number of attendees. Plans to make a cantilever West Stand and increase capacity look real clever huh? Edit: West Stand Capacity: 11000 South Stand Capacity: 5000 North Stand Capacity: 7000 East Stand Lower Capacity: 10000 East Stand Upper Capacity: Reduced to c4500 from 7000 Closing the South Stand and the ESU offers Ken no problems at all, and he could probably close the southern Family Section of the East Stand too.
You seem to keep failing to take into account that attendance drops are also down to poor playing quality as well as high pricing, and those people aren't going to stay away forever if the team starts doing better, especially if they're playing PL football. Of course, getting into the PL should be the priority, but it's wrong IMO to think we would have no use for an expanded stadium.
No ****, Simon???? The high prices combined with poor playing quality is exactly why people have walked away. As a longstanding season ticket holder, I know that many of the people who have now given up have done so because of the prices and the fact that we have been sold the lie "if you want Premiership football you have to pay Premiership prices", while Bates had no intention of using our money to even attempt to deliver a competitive team. Many of those people will stay away until Bates has gone and prices are more realistic, because they are sick to their back teeth of having been fed and sucked up his lies. I accept your opinion that we would have a use for an expanded stadium. I just disagree with your opinion. Only sporadically have we sold out our ground at its current capacity, and it would have to be used for a lot more than just football twice a month. So I would say you seem to keep failing to take into account the realistic situation and history of Bates, and even of Leeds United.
We regularly reached capacity in 99-02, and even averaged 36,666 in a relegation year. In my opinion we'd make good use of of a 45-50k seater stadium in the context of a recent triumphant return to the PL, especially in the big games, not to mention that a redone expanded capacity stadium would draw more people in itself. Now of course all of this would be dependent on a return to the Premiership, which is of course the immediate priority, but I do think we could make good use of a bigger stadium given the right circumstances. Of course none of this hides the fact that this is all so the next owner will have more rent to pay to the mysterious owner of the off-shore company that owns ER.
I've not heard that rumour. Although if it did happen, it would be the shameful end to the South Stand saga. Last season, it was full or near-full for most games and had a great atmosphere. This season, the only times it's been filled and buzzing have been when the scum ****s were in there and for the West Ham game. Bates said he'd only build the East Stand boxes on the proviso that we could remove the South Stand ones and recoup the 1,500 seats we lost. Hasn't happened. Normal fans treated like **** while the corporates and execs are exalted and prioritized. The stewards have seemingly been arsey in there all season and it has been to the detriment of the players' backing. And the prices, while the lowest in the stadium, are still way too bloody high. A debacle really, just like almost everything else coming out of LUFC.
Exactly Simon - the current expanded stadium only reached capacity regularly in three years since its 1994 inception (18 years). Plus, to generate the excitement to get people in that door, we "lived the dream" and bought players we can only dream about. Any realistic (sic!) return to the Prem would also realistically be tinged with a forecast of coming back down straight away, or at best, just staving off relegation for a few years. We would not be competing at the same level as Man U, Man C, Chelsea, Arsenal, Liverpool or Tottenham. So we would not generate excitement at all, more a nail-biting stressful season after season until we finally did what Blackburn have threatened for years. Unless we were sold to some multi-billionaire. I do see that as a possibility. We could be marketed as historic rivals and close geographic neighbours to Man U and Man C, with a well-known international brand and a huge possible local audience, no immediate city competitors, and potential to expand massively. On the plus side, there are many women and children who attend football at ER and this has led to a huge reduction in hooliganism (which remains throughout football, not exclusively at LUFC). If the marketing and the pricing was right, ER could be filled every week, the supporters could be content, and we could all march on together while the club could make money. The interesting bit is that any new owner could actually choose not to bother with keeping ER despite its upgrades, and could choose to look for a better place to have a LUFC stadium. Now that would scare the hell out of Bates as he would never get his money back from the upgrades to a ground that LUFC does not own
I can quite easily see Bates selling up on promotion and watching the money roll in from his stadium developments. Even if he didn't we could use Newcastle as a model instead of Man City.
It's still not agreed whether Bates owns the stadium. Some say Paul Caddick, some say Simon Morris. There are virtues in all the suggestions.
Defo not Morris - it would have come out in his recent tribulations (bankruptcy and fraud cases) Can't see it being Caddick as they are the firm requiring payment for doing all the building work But if it is Bates and any potential buyer of the club tells Bates that the price of the club excludes the ground as all they will sign up to is continuing the rental agreement, then the person who has put up the money for the ground improvements is in a bit of a tricky situation. Plus the ground can be bought for the agreed price. £14m. By 2028 - plenty of time yet. A third party coming in and buying the club will also be able to buy the improved ground for that same price until 2028. So where is the asset benefit to Bates? Is he actually being quite philanthropic to the club? Need to think this one through looking at all the angles - not convinced on any of my ramblings
Bates is not getting any younger, I wondered the other day how many more years he would give it. He obviously see's Elland Road and the rental income as his families nest egg. I would love it if a new owner came in and once the papers were signed announced that they would be moving us to a new stadium. Yes tradition says we should stay at Elland Road but I would rather see it empty and ruin Bates and play matches in a new stadium than watch him get drip fed by our success.
All if's and maybes. Of course people will come back if the quality of football improves, but the current strategy is stopping that from happening. The quality of football will only improve if all the stars align and we some how get together a real, top quality squad on a shoe string budget. We'd have to get insanely lucky with frees, unproven gems and youth players. This is one of the arguments people use to try and debunk the whole "bates out" argument - of course we'd be happy if the football improved, but the flaw in that logic is it's not going to improve with such a negative strategy.
As for bates being "philanthropic", I doubt it. His history suggests whatever he's doing doesn't make any financial sense.
Just to point out I'm not saying I think this is a good idea, I'm just countering 666's claims we would have no use for an expanded stadium.
How much do you think the ER land is worth ? Must be close to £10 million. Bates would win either way.
We have use for an expanded stadium in a hypothetical situation where we're in the Premier League and fans are made to feel wanted at their own football club. We have no use for an expanded stadium under the current regime, and since it's the current regime and only the current regime who want to build it, it's entirely counter-productive.
So you want to cut police and steward costs down by closing one stand but you also want to build a huge cantilever stand?
