Old Trafford revamp/could be torn down and rebuilt according to Glazer plans

What’s your preference for Old Trafford?

  • Rebuild

    Votes: 714 48.4%
  • Renovate

    Votes: 736 49.9%
  • Leave it as is

    Votes: 26 1.8%

  • Total voters
    1,476
It's not the same stand. Only very small parts of the original (basically the ramped concrete flooring of the old players' tunnel) are said to survive, then it was rebuilt following the WWII bombing. It was then rebuilt a second time in the 1970s to replicate the north stand that was itself rebuilt in time for the 1966 World Cup. That stand wasn't the first cantelever at a football ground, either. That honour went to Scunthorpe United's Old Show Ground in 1958.


How much was it rebuilt in the 70s? I'm aware that it was rebuilt post war but I've always assumed it's always been the same structure.
 
How much was it rebuilt in the 70s? I'm aware that it was rebuilt post war but I've always assumed it's always been the same structure.
The stand itself didn't change much (as in the concrete base/steps) in the 70s but the cheap roof they'd put up post-war was replaced with the cantilever in a couple of sections. It looked a right mismatch when I first went in mid 70s. They built the exec lounges and stuff over the back and formed the tunnel at that time.
 
Is the abstract concept of 'history' for the sake of a pitch being a few hundred metres in one direction rather than another worth the exorbitant additional costs and playing at some other stadium for 3 years?

I don’t think that the short term issues are worth getting bogged down in. Were planning for a stadium that could still be functional in fifty years time so whatever happens over the next couple of years shouldn’t dictate our long term future.

Yes the history surrounding the stadium is important to some but not at all to others. Just like the price of the stadium is important to some but not to others. I don’t want us financially crippled so that we cannot compete in the market but I also don’t care whether it costs 600 million or 900 million, I just want the best final product and in my opinion that is a fully pimped out old trafford.
 
There were pictures in the Telegraph article (14/3/22) that if there was a new stadium it would be built to the north west of the current position, so we could continue to play at OT without a problem, until the new stadium was finished, saving a fortune and reducing the build time. (I can't post pictures, maybe someone can.) This and the fact Spurs didn't own the land, is what jacked up their price. United own all the car parks north and south of the river and all the way down to the railway line. They also own and lease out the freight yard to the west of the car parks, on a short term lease. I think it's a 3 to 5 year lease and it's close to renewal. Possibly a reason why this has come up again or because of the Glazers PR spin away from the Superleague mess.

Buying the freight yard was done before the Glazers came in when United under David Gill when we were looking at updating the ground in the early 2000's and were struggling with Network Rail and came up with rebuilding as a Plan B. There are discussions about this on here both in the early 2000's, the early 2010's and in 2019, if you look back. It comes up when everyone gets board every 3-5 years and nothing happens under the Glazer's.

The womens/youth team stadium would be built on the OT current site possibly retaining the pitch or some of the historic features of Old Trafford and would be c20-40k seats or be easily expandable if only 20k.

Rebuilding is competitive in terms of price as redeveloping OT. Network Rail would charge us a fortune to close the line for rebuilding the south stand, even if it was for a few weeks. The longer it takes to redevelop, the more it would cost. There would be no income from the south stand while it was rebuilt. In addition there would also be reductions in match day revenue as you improve the north, east and west side to improve leg room, site lines and install the big TVs for VAR reviews, let alone sorting out the big issues of atmosphere and good WiFi in an old stadium. You could also gain revenue by what you add outside the ground for supporters instead of having car parks such as fan parks, an external museum, fan experience centre, separate concert venue, rides, big wheel, circus, any other crap for tourists etc as well as making it look prettier like a park and less like an industrial estate.
Car parking (or lack of) is one of the main obstacles to any expansion or development. The police would object to any plans for increased attendances and have said so in previous feasibility studies. Local people over a mile from the ground routinely complain about on street parking problems and this issue isn't going to go away any time soon, unfortunately.
 
Car parking (or lack of) is one of the main obstacles to any expansion or development.

This this is a massive issue for the Police.

Also for fans, the car parking that exists is limited in terms of access and egress issues, (e.g. the limitations, bridges over canal etc.) on the main W1, W2 and N3 car parks assist in controlling access, over a pre-match, say 2 hour period, but are a 'bottle-neck' nightmare for egress, when everyone wants to leave at the same time.

Any new stadium would probably require access direct from motorways/main roads via remote (hub-style) car parking facilities, with shuttle buses, escalated walkways, wheel chair routes, taking fans to the ground itself.
 
I know there's complications in building a new stadium at the current location because of the rail tracks and canal, and more or less likely in having to play at a different location while the new stadium is being built. But could they knock down a stand each season and build it up while using the 3 other stands for the crowd?

For e.g

2022/23 - South Stand knocked down and built up. North, East and West stands operate as normal.
2023/24 - East Stand knocked down and built up. North, West and South(new) stands operate as normal.
2024/25 - North Stand knocked down and built up. West, South(new) and East(new) stands operate as normal.
2025/26 - West Stand knocked down and built up. South(new), East(new) and North(new) stands operate as normal.
2026/27 - All stands are now complete and a brand new stadium.

I think that could work. :angel:
 
I know there's complications in building a new stadium at the current location because of the rail tracks and canal,…….

The option of building a totally new stadium, would see it built next door (read back up the thread), so there will be no need to knock anything down until the new stadium is ready to be used.

The option to rebuild the current stadium is basically what you’re describing.
As has already been said, the downside to this is the significant reduction in match day revenue, over several seasons, plus the extended build time ( more time = more cost), due to safeguarding and other issues, so that matches can continue to be played, during the period when demolition and building work is carried out.

If you’re going to rebuild completely, it might be more cost effective and worthwhile in the long run, to just build on the adjacent land.


.
 
Car parking (or lack of) is one of the main obstacles to any expansion or development. The police would object to any plans for increased attendances and have said so in previous feasibility studies. Local people over a mile from the ground routinely complain about on street parking problems and this issue isn't going to go away any time soon, unfortunately.

In a 21st century building project in a major city at an event with its own tram stop it ridiculous to plan for fans to come by car. It makes far more sense to improve the tram station, bus, taxi, walking, cycling and possibly park and ride (with a car park outside of the M60) options.
 
In a 21st century building project in a major city at an event with its own tram stop it ridiculous to plan for fans to come by car. It makes far more sense to improve the tram station, bus, taxi, walking, cycling and possibly park and ride (with a car park outside of the M60) options.
A park and ride system would be good. Have a greenfield or abandoned brownfield site on the edge of the city for parking and a free or a £1 a ride into the ground. Went to Oxford (the city not the club) 4 years ago and they did this.
 
As has already been said, the downside to this is the significant reduction in match day revenue, over several seasons, plus the extended build time ( more time = more cost), due to safeguarding and other issues, so that matches can continue to be played, during the period when demolition and building work is carried out.



.


Meh. Man utd have the money and will always have money. Losing a few here and there won't affect them.
 
Meh. Man utd have the money and will always have money. Losing a few here and there won't affect them.

So you think there’s a huge vault stuffed with an endless amounts of money?
There isn’t.
Do you have any clue how large businesses work?
Match day revenue is a key component of Utd’s cash flow.
Without that cashflow, the business will run into difficulties.
Utd depend on all their income streams to survive. Match day, sponsorships, corporate deals, TV rights, merchandising, advertising and other commercial income. Reduce, or take away any of those and the club will edge towards running at a loss,.
If a loss making situation becomes unsustainable, we won’t be able to service our huge debts, defaulting and insolvency becomes a risk.
There’ll be no need for a new stadium then.

There are 3 options on the table,
refurbishment and rebuild the south stand,
rebuild all or most of the stadium,
or, build a brand new stadium on adjacent land,
The finance required to carry out any of those options, will require large investment and/or borrowing.
To cover that cost, requires a robust income stream extending over a long time period.
A reduced income stream during the build, won’t help matters and will only increase our debts and liabilities into the future.
That’s one of the positives in going for the new stadium option and adds to the viability of the whole scheme.
It’ll be a finely judged decision on choosing which way forward.
Esoteric notions of tradition, blah, blah, don’t really have much weight, in the big scheme of things.
 
Last edited:
I'm not in favour of a new stadium but it does offer an opportunity for United to do something pretty special. I was just reading about how Cardiff will be hosting a WWE event later in the year and it's remarkable how often Cardiff is chosen for these events but in reality, there's no other option for a stadium in winter. That WWE event will be in September so it can't be in London because Wembley doesn't have a roof and it's too risky to assume the weather will be fine, so where else is there for 70,000+ fans in winter? It's only Cardiff.

Manchester is geographically central in the UK, it has excellent connections with roads, several train stations, a tram line and an airport etc.. When you hear about these big events, like boxing, concerts or whatever, and they can't be done in London because of the weather, Manchester would easily be the best option. Cardiff is currently the best option but Manchester is just better than Cardiff in every way.

A 90,000 seat football ground, that would be 100,000 for non-football events, with a fully retractable roof is an exciting thought. United would sell it out every week anyway, and they'd make phenomenal money from commercial events, like Joshua/Fury, the NFL or whatever. Having that in Manchester would be big for the city too.
 


Manchester United has appointed a team of leading consultants to begin work on creating a masterplan for the redevelopment of Old Trafford.
The team will be led by Legends International and Populous, both of which have a wealth of stadium development experience from across the globe.
Work will begin immediately on developing options for Old Trafford and studying their feasibility, with the aim of significantly enhancing the fan experience.

Fans will be at the heart of the process, starting with a meeting between the consultants and the Manchester United Fans’ Advisory Board later this month.

A similar process is already under way in relation to the club’s training facilities, with KSS appointed to develop a masterplan for an expanded, state-of-the-art facility for the Men’s, Women’s and Academy teams.
 
Plunging the club into further debt and also likely hampering our transfer kitty each summer.

Glazers are too poor to own a top tier club like ours. Time to sell to someone wealthier and feck off.
 
Latest PR strategy - hiring consultants. Big ideas, master plans, 5 year plans, Rangnick gegenpress, anything to seem like the club is busy.
 






I know people are going to say oh same old same old, but you know, football structures in place, things seem to be changing ever so slightly. I want the Glazers out as much as anyone, but if they aren't going is it time to maybe see if these changes go ahead and where it takes us, there just seems to be something in the air thats different now
 
"developing options for Old Trafford and studying their feasibility"

I'd imagine the study will be long and thorough, with scientists from all over the world participating.
 
That is just a typical United press statement now a days. It means absolutely nothing.
 
Circa 6 months time "after an exhaustive amount of research we've decided it's best to keep Old Trafford as it currently stands"
 
Sadly nothing at all about a new purpose built stadium for the women's team that we can call our own, and that is easy to get to.
 
Same company that did Wembley, The Emirates and the new Spurs stadium.
 
The club should do a Spurs and completely rebuild. 100,000 capacity :drool:
It's the same stadium designer at least! Worked on the Fulham redevelopment and Wembley as well so at the very least we'll hopefully get a decent roof.
 






I know people are going to say oh same old same old, but you know, football structures in place, things seem to be changing ever so slightly. I want the Glazers out as much as anyone, but if they aren't going is it time to maybe see if these changes go ahead and where it takes us, there just seems to be something in the air thats different now

It's worth a go. When the Glazers came along I wanted them out because they were just a bunch of rich wankers wanting to steal money, but now that every club and their dog have owners I just want them to actually have a plan that isn't just about bleeding us dry. If this is the start of major improvements to the club then I won't really mind if they skim the cream off the top.
 
They seem quite keen to leak positive news, just a few days ahead of renewed protests about their ownership.
 
Car parking (or lack of) is one of the main obstacles to any expansion or development. The police would object to any plans for increased attendances and have said so in previous feasibility studies. Local people over a mile from the ground routinely complain about on street parking problems and this issue isn't going to go away any time soon, unfortunately.
Change the plans to drive in watching football
 
Already we're seeing "nothing in this, they're just saying it to keep us quiet". I've said it time and time again.. Since the Super League protests, we've seen a difference in the Glazers. I'll never forgive them for how they've ran the club, but if they're not going to sell (which they show no sign of doing) then maybe, just maybe, they're starting to listen and realise that they've been shit?

I think now we've hired a company, we will certainly see progress on this, which is great news. It won't be quick though.

Does anyone know when Spurs were at this point, for example, and how long it took to completion from that point?
 
Did we put together a list of 500 applicants and decided on our top choice using Data analysis programs? If not I'd be worried.
 
Already we're seeing "nothing in this, they're just saying it to keep us quiet". I've said it time and time again.. Since the Super League protests, we've seen a difference in the Glazers. I'll never forgive them for how they've ran the club, but if they're not going to sell (which they show no sign of doing) then maybe, just maybe, they're starting to listen and realise that they've been shit?

I think now we've hired a company, we will certainly see progress on this, which is great news. It won't be quick though.

Does anyone know when Spurs were at this point, for example, and how long it took to completion from that point?
Spurs stadium was planned in 2008, so nearly ten years for it to actually see fruition.

There's a long long way to go yet.