Ah that's brilliant! I won't be so lucky though, only rows down the bottom or right near the top are available, all around me are now taken. We'll find a way to bundle in together though! In total, once that lot have bought their tickets, there'll hopefully be about 15 of us all in block 209 (or maybe 210 if they can't get 209) which will be great, throughout WHL years all the boys have been scattered; a few in Paxton, a few in East and a few in Park Lane, so now that we're all going to be near each other in the same block - or at least the same stand - will be great, hopefully down the line we can try and see if Spurs can possibly rearrange things to get us all near one another.
That's correct. I'm a member. The logic of that is by selling a relatively small number of very expensive seats they covered a high proportion of the stadium's cost. If they hadn't done that they would have only had about two thirds of the budget to build the stadium and that would mean the stadium would be much smaller and ticket allocations for fans would be lower. Most Club Wembley members seem to be like me: proper fans who happen to have a bit of money and want to use that to guarantee seats for big matches. If Spurs are not playing I often give my tickets to other clubs' fans.
I don't have a problem with that, provided that ticket holders attend the game and watch it from their seat or move the ticket on, at face value, to someone who is going to do that. empty seating and touting are problems. Building stadia is an extremely expensive enterprise. Mostly, they have to be paid for by the end user and the faster you get the debt down, the less interest you pay out of your increased income. I'm sure Wembley would love another season of Spurs playing there. Somewhere between £11m and £15m plus all the concessions is nice, although given the attendances, they should probably just have taken a percentage of the gate. I'm sure that we've exceeded even the club's best estimates.
N seasons of Chelsky soon to come for them ?? Although I would still like Levy to try a potential land grab on having the option to play some CL games at Wembley (in case we draw big fish like Madrid again) .
Their problem is going to be getting agreement to using the whole stadium. Wembley can have any number of events without using the upper tier. The usage of the whole stadium is significantly limited because the stadium has only a certain number of such 'licences' agreed by Brent Council. When you take out internationals, semi-finals and Finals plus internationals, pop concerts and NFL games, etc., we had less than 10 opportunities to use the full capacity. I think the exact number was 6 but I'm not certain. Wembley and the club applied to have the number increased. It was but there was significant opposition. My mum still lives in Wembley and I go back to see her and spoke to a few people who raised it with me when I wore a Spurs polo shirt. There was a lot of opposition but the Council got it through by stressing that it was for one season only and they got the club to do a lot of health related publicity and we gave out a load of tickets to schools, etc. Granting 4 or 5 years of full usage to 'them' is a whole different thing. A fair number of Councillors would be ending their political careers. Living in Wembley when it's being used for a big game is a huge pain in the arse for the normal resident and catastrophic for businesses other than fast food, think old WHL x 2.5. Chelsea won't want to use a half empty stadium and I just don't see them getting enough full stadium usage to be attractive without introducing something new to the debate. I wonder if a huge bag of roubles will buy off enough people?
I wonder if Chelsky might try and do a 50:50 split between Wembley and Twickenham. Anyway, for Spurs to reach the CL SFs would mean a maximum of 6 home games. So based on what you said, a Wembley full capacity grant would be ok. If you think of this season repeated next, then you could do the Dortmund/Madrid games at Wembley, and the Apoel game at WHL. No doubt the club has built up sufficient goodwill with the stadium / council etc over the two recent seasons for this to be an option.
It could only be a split for cup games and league games. PL rules say that you have to play all games at one stadium in one season, hence the issue with overruns of NWHL. Getting used to 2 new homes would be very tough, I should hope. Unfortunately, Twickenham's planning permission for the rebuild was granted on the basis that usage was restricted. No football. The local residents probably saw this coming or something like it and so, the Council would have to reverse it for 4-5 years. At which point, you're back with the Wembley problem. Celsea have asked us, Arsenal and the owners of the White Elephant. The problem is that the Spammers have exclusivity for use in relation to football and we and The Gooners told them to **** off. Their delay on starting works reflects the fact that they're in a ****ing big hole....currently known as Stamford Bridge. I wonder why the press aren't reporting it?
London's a bad place to build anything....but hey, it's London. Where else is there? It isnt for no reason that Dr Johnson didn't say... "Why, Sir, you find no man, at all intellectual, who is willing to leave Birmingham. No, Sir, when a man is tired of Newcastle, he is tired of life; for there is in Milton Keynes all that life can afford."
Can any PL pitch, no matter how well maintained between games, actually survive double the home games in one season without requiring several re-layings ?? If the pitch quality issue is resolvable, I suspect that if it was Fulhams' first club, QPR etc, that Spurs would be open to helping. But Chelsky have got a verminous "reap what you sow" due to what they are. I am surprised cash king Kroenke did not consider it, given that the relationship between the Goons and Chelsky only has Cashley Cole as an ill point. However given the Goons may now be in PL free-fall, putting Chelsky in difficulty helps them recover. "Their delay on starting works reflects the fact that they're in a ****ing big hole....currently known as Stamford Bridge. I wonder why the press aren't reporting it?" Just did a sat view of their site. They have no adjacent land they can begin construction on, as was the case for new WHL. Based on new WHL, the quickest it could probably get done is in 2 years (or 3) . Such a pity ... (honestly)
The basic reason the stadium's there is due to one white elephant after another. First the creation of Wembley Park and the Tube extension was created for the Wembley Tower project of the 1890s that only got as far as...well, this... please log in to view this image ...before a combination of massively escalating costs, the not insignificant problem of the soil of Wembley Park turning out to be a very bad place to try and build a monument to Britain's penis envy of France, and the man behind the project dying (having previously suffered a stroke early in the albino pachyderm's construction phase) seeing the project cancelled and the tower dynamited. Needing a centrepiece for the park, though, led to the British Empire Exhibition of 1925-6 that...guess what? At the end of the exhibition's eighteen month run it was £6m in the red (which, adjusted for inflation, is £347.4m) - but the British Empire Exhibition Stadium, the centrepiece of the exhibition, was retained and turned into the home of English football more out of embarrassment at building a stadium for a colossal waste of public funds that never came close to achieving the projected number of visitors. I certainly can't think of any modern equivalents of that...
The Club Wembley licences ban you from selling on your ticket. You can sell it to other Club Wembley members at a maximum of face value, give it away or donate it to charity. In practice they can't really police that but you'd be at risk selling it to a your if the buyer misbehaved because you could lose the entire licence.
Never a truer word said in jest. I could see a situation where they play PL games only at one ground, and other games at another stadium.
Chelsea should find some legal issue with West Ham's contract for the Olympic stadium and move in for five years, instead. I'm sure it wouldn't be very hard to do and it would be hilarious.
