If you say so. If it goes tits up then so be it but Fernandes and Bhatia are far more credible than any of Pompey's various boards.
I would probably not doubt that to be honest, I think TF is better than what Pompey have had to endure over the last 5-6 years. All the same Watford, there must be the slightest concern if PL status is not ensured? I am not suggesting QPR will go down this season, I really do believe if they can keep the home record going they will be mid table at worst. A drop from the PL is likely to be bad enough for any team but if for some reason you should go down and languish in the Championship (or worse) for some years (as we did not so long ago, Ipswich, Coventry, Southampton & Leeds etc. have done) it must be a concern. I know this particular risk needs to be taken, god knows you do need a new stadium, but it is quite a significant risk and perhaps a little caution from the fans perspective is needed as opposed to being like a bunch of kids let loose in a candy store.
If you design a stadium with a roof is there than no further option of expansion? Or is it still possible to incorporate this into the design? I would go along with what several others are saying and suggest that ensuring you are an established prem club before ploughing all money into a new stadium as it has cost clubs in the past. Maybe more sensible to build a 25-30k stadium with the option to expand if required?
there's a balance to be had. it is possible to show big ambition without being unrealistic. qpr have not found that balance just yet too many risks being taken. they won't all pay off.
Confirmed it will be a 45k non bowl. I think the reason why a lot of teams are stuck in the NPC is that they all build flat pack bowls and lose the atmosphere. Only Swansea are better off after a new stadium and they will soon be back down. It will be nice having a bigger ground that chelsea.
this is a massive mistake then. absolutely no chance whatsoever that qpr will fill a 45k stadium. it simply won't happen. my point above about being ambitious but realistic are appearing more true all the time. qpr haven't got the balance right. 32, maybe 35k and i've have said this is great news for rangers. not now.
Saints went from 15k to 33k and are looking to expand again. 35 is right now but not for the future. 45k is probably too big now as we will only fill it against the big teams but will do us for a long time. Maybe Tony is going to have us as the only affordable team in London btw, we are going to have green and gold hoops for our 3rd kit this season, Caterhams colours.
but southampton have a huge fan base! qpr do not (no offence but its true). people don't just suddenly change their allegiance to another team - it isn't going to work. 35k is absolute tops for a club of qpr's stature. you are risking your clubs entire future by reaching for the stars to soon. it WILL go wrong and nobody wants to see a club go bust. build steadily and you have a chance but this has 'disaster' written all over it.
Just puttin the question out there Is QPR's plan to build a 45,000 seated stadium the biggest waste of footballing money since fernando Torres?
You cant build steadily if you have a roof. chelsea had 4 figure crowds a few years before the crooked russian took over. QPR hold the record for the biggest wembley allocation too so the fanbase is there. As for people not switching their allegiance? I never saw a chelsea shirt wear I live until the russian took over and now there are loads of them. They probably used to be Man U fans 10 years ago. How will the club go bust when its being used as a hotel (obviously pushed by air asia) and things like concerts all year round? We would only go bust if we didnt move.
If it is finacially safe for QPR to expand/build a new stadium to 35k then why not? That generates more income and it makes sense to have Premier League facilities in the Premier League. However, it would be incredibly risky to perhaps go over a 35k capacity as the club are in London and there are plenty of other clubs to choose from. Many of them much bigger clubs. In Norwich it is safe to go for a 35k capacity as it would quite possibly easily be filled with no other club nearby and the already high demand for season tickets.
The other clubs are sold out, how would fans choose them. QPR would be the only team not sold out thus the only option for see PL football. At least until WHU possibly move but then whod want to go to that awful ground where you could be 50m away from the touchline? 99.4%-capacity – Arsenal. 98.6%-capacity – Tottenham Hotspur. 98.3%-capacity – Fulham. Attendance 97.61%-capacity – Chelsea 4 out of the top 6 filled ground were london clubs.
very naive view flyer. chelsea have always been a big club, but they hadn't had much success till abramovich turned up. they were already a top four club when he rolled into town and had been for almost a decade - they were steadily improving and began to have success even without his cash. qpr are a million miles away from that stage, that is why you cannot compare the two clubs. chelsea had four figure crowds in the 80s when football was in the doldrums. anybody can turn up for a game at wembley - luton took 42k (by the way, southampton hold the wembley attendance record - just thought you might like to know). it will take qpr 30+ years to pay off that stadium and i would bet my mortgage that they would average no more than 30k in that stadium - i actually doubt they'd average that many but i'm feeling generous. as said above, 35k would be ambitious but give you the chance to grow as a club realistically - i'd go as far as to say that could be the making of the club, but this is too much and will backfire, i'm 100% sure of it.
Seems very risky to me, it does depend however on how much capital they have to spend on a stadium or if they are going to take out a massive loan. Can't see them filling a 45k seater and if they were to go down and only say get 15k it can start to cost more money than it brings in. Basically if they do this they will have to build a successful club very quickly in order to make it worth while, if they are able to grow that quickly is another matter
well you can't fault Tony fernandez for ambition that's for sure. can the club keep up with all the change? it'll be interesting for sure. regarding the stadium, i think they will get some of it (say 5k) filled through casual fans who want to go to a premier league game. Look at craven cottage - the putney end, apart from the away allocation, contains a lot of people in this category. clearly there is demand for it as long as the premier league is thriving.
chelsea average attendances. 1995 21.057 1994 19.416 1993 18.787 1992 18.686 1991 20.738 Not much for a "big club"
check out man united's attendances during those years southampton now get as many as man utd used to in the late 80s. football wasn't what it is today back then - for starters, chelsea's ground didn't hold much more than 25k at that time! anyone who thinks chelsea are not or have never previously been a big club is in denial. perfectly fair to say they were not successful or underachieved but they were always a big name. they have always been a much bigger club than qpr and are likely always to be so. nothing wrong with that - qpr are a good club, but they aren't comparable to chelsea in terms of stature.
But people would still rather choose the bigger clubs. I would like to be proven wrong though. So many big clubs do close together won't help clubs like QPR expanding their stadium. Norwich are waiting before a big expansion takes place but Norwich also have a huge demand for tickets due to the location.
All good points but when you think QPR will play there say 22 - 25 times a season you can see how a universal use stadia with a retractable roof will be used for concerts etc etc. It would be naive to think they will fund it purely on QPR home games! Whether such a non-football demand exists to stack the numbers up I have no idea but I can't see them 'wasting' the money if it wasn't viable.
