Kinsella
Copy & Paste Merchant
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2012
- Messages
- 3,471
Here’s the opinion we all needed to hear…
Our neighbors are Turkic countries with nomadic roots or countries who were conquered and held by nomads for centuries, so there's nothing funny there for them. The world is no centered around European stereotypes.Are you mocked by your neighbouring countries for having such a tent building?
Well tbh when I think of United I don't immediately think "ships!" either. It's a football stadium in the end.Exactly.
I feel they've focused the design on something which doesn't really represent the club or city.
What does the city of Manchester and Man Utd mean or symbolise to people?
Here’s the opinion we all needed to hear…
Here’s the opinion we all needed to hear…
just exposing ignorance. Not liking the building is one thing, mocking language/culture is another. And it's definetely not humor. Key&Peele is humor, Fry&Laurie is humor, Ricky Gervais is humor. Supermacy is not. If doesn't fit your taste - I accept, belittling my culture - I won't.I wouldn’t, he seems overly protective of that building and devoid of humour. You might end up starting a war or something.
Well tbh when I think of United I don't immediately think "ships!" either. It's a football stadium in the end.
Here’s the opinion we all needed to hear…
He’s “flabbergasted”
Won’t the revenue from the extra seats effectively pay off the cost of the stadium build within a few years?
He’s “flabbergasted”
Won’t the revenue from the extra seats effectively pay off the cost of the stadium build within a few years?
It'll take a whole lot more than a few years to pay off the stadium with the revenue from the additional seats.
There will be additional revenue from hospitality and depending on how many of these additional seats will be hospitality would have an affect, but it could take anywhere between 35 and 70 years to pay it off that way.
Say the additional 25,000 seats sell for £100 on average for every game (picked a high figure here, I know). This would work out to an additional £2.5m in revenue per game, allow 28 games per season (19 Prem, 6 Europe and 3 Cup Games) gives an additional £70m per season in ticket revenue.
A build of £2.5b in total would take 35-36 years to pay off with an additional £70m in revenue per season. If the average price of the additional tickets was £75 then it would be 45-50 years and if it was £50 then it would be over 70 years
Obviously there will be a whole range of other revenue from other things (concerts, restaurants, kiosks etc) that will chip away at this, but it would still take years to pay off.
Here’s the opinion we all needed to hear…
Yeah, I suppose that makes sense. At least as part of a fanciful initial design, although it is reminding me of Homer Simpson's car design in that respect.I heard it is a 360 viewing platform which I guess you’ll be able to go up for a cost obviously.
We neither.
I guess in terms of Man United and the city of Manchester, I think of invention and reinvention, creativity, youth, energy, flair.
I mean I think in terms of the industrial revolution, Busby babes, Munich disaster and the recovery thereafter, post-industrial recovery of the city, Fergie rebuilding the club and building new teams centered on youth, the musical history is world famous also etc...
I'm not sure how you symbolise all that though.
You recreate Old Trafford in a modern version and make it bigger. That would carry over what we will lose with this new toilet bowl.
I think people underestimate how much will be gone in regards to emotional connection once Old Trafford is demolished and we walk into the American Express arena.
People who reference "but the money" really don't understand the value of nostalgia and memories.
He’s “flabbergasted”
Won’t the revenue from the extra seats effectively pay off the cost of the stadium build within a few years?
Don’t disagree with any of that. Negotiating with the past is tricky business—a business the club haven’t been good at for the past decade.This is a very good way of putting it.
Although, within that metaphor it's also true to say that, in a storm, anchors are not always bad things. Sometimes it pays to stay connected to your history. I think a new stadium is probably the right way to go, so I'm not disagreeing with you as such, it's just something to be mindful of. Quite a few other clubs (cough, City, cough) would do anything to have your history. It's one of the few things money can't buy.
In the interview with one of the architects I listened to, not Foster, he said they designed it first and then thought—oh, that looks a bit like a trident. Classic retrofitting.I didn't really associate Man Utd with the trident though . So it feels weird to theme a stadium around it. It doesn't symbolise the club or city really.
I don't call them the red devils either though.
I think they should've latched onto something else really and themed the stadium around that.
Like "Theatre of Dreams" maybe.
Or "Reinvention" maybe as a theme of the city and club.
In the interview with one of the architects I listened to, not Foster, he said they designed it first and then thought—oh, that looks a bit like a trident. Classic retrofitting.
Here’s the opinion we all needed to hear…
In the interview with one of the architects I listened to, not Foster, he said they designed it first and then thought—oh, that looks a bit like a trident. Classic retrofitting.
Here’s the opinion we all needed to hear…
What the hell has it got to to with Paul Merson.Paul Merson is actually fàbregasted. What a stupid rant, not sure why they are even calling him for anything.
Yeah, the architects said that trident design came pretty much as afterthought or when it was all finished. It's not a bad idea, but if they proceed with it I think it can look even better. As someone said conecting it in some way with United Trinity would be nice for example.
So does Manchester City, the trident is unique to us.Salford, Manchester and Man United all have a ship on their crest/coat of arms.
I would've shaped the canopy like a ship to represent the club.
Salford, Manchester and Man United all have a ship on their crest/coat of arms.
I would've shaped the canopy like a ship to represent the club.
So we picked some tent fetishist to design our stadium. Great.Norman Foster is a big fan of tents. He has been developing tent structure building technogoly for decades. Here is the biggest tent building in the world, Khan Shatyr (King's Tent) Mall in our capital Astana.
Designed by Foster+Partners. Source: Foster + Partners website
He’s “flabbergasted”
Won’t the revenue from the extra seats effectively pay off the cost of the stadium build within a few years?
I'm personally massively in favour of the new stadiumBig Word for Paul that is.
On your comments, this is a worry for some fans, because the owners will be chasing to pay off the stadium costs as fast as possible. So extortionate ticket prices and non United events (England, American singers etc) will be important in doing so. Therefore the club doesn’t remain as the main focus.
It’s all well and good now. But if results on the pitch don’t change we’ll look pathetic as a club when Taylor Swift is performing the night after we’ve been spanked against Bournemouth for example. But some fans will reel out the old, ‘the clubs still making money’ argument.
Ineos have already made some poor signings so I’m more concerned about them getting this right and having us heading in the right direction on the pitch before new stadium stuff is spoke about.
I’d be curious to know how many of 845 who have voted on this poll so far, will be going tonight.
Just my opinion, which holds no more weight than anyone else’s here and will be scoffed at by some, which they have the right to do, but this whole thing looks more like a financial dream for the owners (who won’t recycle the profits back into the club) then it does on actually improving results on the pitch. Which is all that matters to me. I couldn’t give a damn how many homes or jobs are created. It’s not Manchester United’s responsibility to give people homes or provide catering jobs.
Yep the updated Brenabeu won't be paid off until 2053.It'll take a whole lot more than a few years to pay off the stadium with the revenue from the additional seats.
There will be additional revenue from hospitality and depending on how many of these additional seats will be hospitality would have an affect, but it could take anywhere between 35 and 70 years to pay it off that way.
Say the additional 25,000 seats sell for £100 on average for every game (picked a high figure here, I know). This would work out to an additional £2.5m in revenue per game, allow 28 games per season (19 Prem, 6 Europe and 3 Cup Games) gives an additional £70m per season in ticket revenue.
A build of £2.5b in total would take 35-36 years to pay off with an additional £70m in revenue per season. If the average price of the additional tickets was £75 then it would be 45-50 years and if it was £50 then it would be over 70 years
Obviously there will be a whole range of other revenue from other things (concerts, restaurants, kiosks etc) that will chip away at this, but it would still take years to pay off.
In 10-15 years whole thing could be paid off just in extra revenue, which isn't too bad imo.
https://www.ssbm.ch/how-manchester-uniteds-stadium-project-is-a-lesson/?utm_source=perplexity
Norman Foster is a big fan of tents. He has been developing tent structure building technogoly for decades. Here is the biggest tent building in the world, Khan Shatyr (King's Tent) Mall in our capital Astana.
Designed by Foster+Partners. Source: Foster + Partners website
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
So we picked some tent fetishist to design our stadium. Great.
Hopefully at least it gives us sexual powers.
"The best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago. The second best time is now."Someone show this thick cnut Spurs revenue increase over the last 5 years and he might actually start to understand the real economic benefits of a new stadium.
He's probably thinking 'why don't they spend that £2 billion on new players over the next 5 years instead?'
Someone show this thick cnut Spurs revenue increase over the last 5 years and he might actually start to understand the real economic benefits of a new stadium.
He's probably thinking 'why don't they spend that £2 billion on new players over the next 5 years instead?'
Here’s the opinion we all needed to hear…