The seems to be a ray of hope regarding the developement of SB, if the article that appeared in todays Times is anything to go by. I quote:- Chelsea have been offered help from Hammersmith & Fulham Council to increase the 42,000 capacity of Stamford Bridge after the club lost out on buying the Battersea Power Station site. The club have said that expanding the stadium is not economically viable, but Nicholas Botterill, the council leader said " The council is again ready to sit down and discuss how Stamford Bridge can be appropriately upgraded." So all is not lost---yet!
Until they find another exit route apart from the Fulham road, developing the Bridge is a no-no! RA doesn't want to develop Stamford Bridge either cos he doesn't own it - WE DO!
And do you blame him???? I wouldn't invest a dime in a venture where I don't own the land. Hiding to nothing.
This is not splashing the cash without a return. If the capacity can be increased by 10,000 on let's say 30 home games a season, times £50 thats £15m extra gate money every year, plus all the ancilliary spend (programmes, bars/food , megastore etc) every season beyond! He may not own the land, but the receipts are all his! I'm sure CPO might be a little bit gracious and appreciate what Roman has done for their asset!
Of course I don't blame him CP, just pointing out the facts. Re-developing the Bridge would be a nightmare having to shut down parts of the stadium. If that happens, we could always move to our second home for a couple of years!
£300M ??? Is that what its going to cost? How can it cost that much? It only cost £700m to demolish the old and create the new Wembley! We're only adding 10,000 seats! Are they going to be gold seats encrusted with diamonds!
Bluemoon2 - Where are these 10,000 seats going to go? it's more like 15,000 anyway and cannot be done without demolishing the old stands! The ground would require an upgrading of the infrastructure and that's where the money will go.
My first thoughts would be new tier's above Matthew Harding and The Shed! I'm not an architect, but before this intervention from H&F council it was always considered possible by the club, but refused because of egress issues! Clearly they've come up with a new "bright" idea!
You have explained my point far better than I did BM2. The CPO need to have a more conciliatory response to the situation, though I must admit, I don't really know all the goings on from either side. Lets just say it's not the best place to be.
I need to make my point better CFC TEL, I agree with you and Bluemoon2, it won't be easy whatever we do, and Roman can't be expected to be a bottomless pit without someone coming his way a little as well.
Funny that, Councils often see the light when they see millions walking away. What about that great big paddock where they have the Chelsea Flower show ??? It only gets used once a year. Swap it for the Bridge!!!! Either that, or put a new bridge span in between Battersea Bridge and Chelsea Bridge, and put the stadium on top . Now that would be a world beater.
It's obvious we need a new ground CP. RA won't develop Stamford Bridge unless A, He owns it and, B, it's a viable proposition. I'm not sure he'd want to develop it even if he did own it to be honest, the cost implication is huge percentage wise compared to building a new ground. We all love the Bridge but the club has to move forward. The CPO (of which I'm one) just want assurances, the club have been a bit vague to be honest & wants some clarity.
It'll be worth tuning in to CTV over the next few days/weeks to find out what reaction the club are taking to it!
