Giggsyking
Full Member
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2013
- Messages
- 9,994
For me, new stadium. We have to be practical. It will cost more in the long run if we keep the old stadium. In addition to that we have to keep up with the new technologies.
I’m not taking a jab at anyone, I have to now trek from London for games and because I have two small children, can only make it 3-4 times a year (so it could be said I am “daytripper” myself. I 100% understand the huge effort that is made by thousands of fans that travel from Ireland, Scandinavia and other distances which costs a small fortune. My point it, the club and its accountants want a stadium which will generate the most money per match day and that requires a large number of supporters who will utilise the facilties, club shop and all the bells and whistles.Stop taking a jab at day tripper as if going to OT is a walk in the park. Most overseas fans have to be super wealthy to come to UK and attend a match. It's not something 50K can fill on weekly basis.
Some have to save for years and that didnt even cover the basic
If 50k of fans in a match day are day trippers then where are the local fans? Dont tell me they can't fill the stadium? It's just a bus ride away for most of yourse
Sorry that didn’t read very well. I meant that any likely renovation to the current stadium would likely be so significant, that it would essentially be a rebuild (£1.5bn is being banded around). Whereas building a “new” stadium literally adjacent would be far more cost effective. Not cheaper, but cost effective as building from scratch rather than a full renovation is easier. I hope that makes more sense?Not sure I follow that bolded part.
It would take longer no doubt. The biggest issue United have is the only realistic option for United to play games is the Etihad and I don't think that is happening.
Ok I've never heard that it could be the case. But how have Liverpool and City been able to undertake major expansions to their stadiums without moving then?
Feels like the stadium we'd have built in 1990s if we decided on a new stadium back thenAI on the ball.
Old Trafford - Powered by Qualcomm.
I thought the bricks thing too, then someone, Spoons I think, pointed out that the local area doesn't have lots of old brick buildings anymore. So a fake one might look well out of place. I don't know now, I'd love to see some different preliminary designs to compare.A new stadium does seem the most sensible choice.
However I do fear modern architecture. I am so tired of seeing glass and steel monstrosities everywhere I go (goes for stadiums and just buildings in general really).
The dream would be a new stadium, but taking inspiration from the past, using bricks as much as possible.
Though I am neither a builder nor architect, so not sure how feasible or cost effective (shudders) that would be.
On a sidenote - anyone know what the expected life-spans of these modern type glass/steel stadiums are? My gut tells me that it's shorter than stone.
Looking at google maps, seems a lot of the newer buildings and larger buildings have been glass-and-steelified already. But there seem to still be a fair bit few old rows of brick houses.I thought the bricks thing too, then someone, Spoons I think, pointed out that the local area doesn't have lots of old brick buildings anymore. So a fake one might look well out of place. I don't know now, I'd love to see some different preliminary designs to compare.
I thought the bricks thing too, then someone, Spoons I think, pointed out that the local area doesn't have lots of old brick buildings anymore. So a fake one might look well out of place. I don't know now, I'd love to see some different preliminary designs to compare.
Not quite surrounding, but I know what you mean. Now look at the larger buildings of Salford Quays, stunning architecture, a totally different world to not that long ago really. And I think when the marshalling yards and the associated warehouses go they won't be replaced by little houses whatever happens to the stadium.There is red brick houses surrounding Old Trafford. And throughout Manchester.
I thought the bricks thing too, then someone, Spoons I think, pointed out that the local area doesn't have lots of old brick buildings anymore. So a fake one might look well out of place. I don't know now, I'd love to see some different preliminary designs to compare.
If the club sold decent booze and food, many fans would probably get there earlier and spend more money.I’m not taking a jab at anyone, I have to now trek from London for games and because I have two small children, can only make it 3-4 times a year (so it could be said I am “daytripper” myself. I 100% understand the huge effort that is made by thousands of fans that travel from Ireland, Scandinavia and other distances which costs a small fortune. My point it, the club and its accountants want a stadium which will generate the most money per match day and that requires a large number of supporters who will utilise the facilties, club shop and all the bells and whistles.
Hopefully.They could use bricks but you'd need more bricks throughout the new district. I suspect if Foster's got anything to do with I doubt he'll use bricks. Besides I don't think they'll use Victoria Warehouse has inspiration for a new stadium and surrounding area. Who knows though eh. Anyway looks like they'll probably start building a new stadium this year on the carcpark and eventually on the freight depot when they buy it. Ratcliffe wants it fast tracked.
Sorry that didn’t read very well. I meant that any likely renovation to the current stadium would likely be so significant, that it would essentially be a rebuild (£1.5bn is being banded around). Whereas building a “new” stadium literally adjacent would be far more cost effective. Not cheaper, but cost effective as building from scratch rather than a full renovation is easier. I hope that makes more sense?