Jump to content

The Aberdeen Mega-Hyper New Stadium Thread


Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, sjc said:

Hopefully that continues but that could be just down to the fixtures so far. Better to look at the season as a whole I'd say.

We've had a worse set of fixtures, particularly with Aberdeen at home. Folk seem desperate to skate our crowds. 

Bare facts are they're higher than out historical crowds, and moving to McDiarmid hasn't harmed the crowds, or the club, which is the only relevance to this thread. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, COYR said:

King's Links available land - 4 hectares

Easter Road - 2.8 hectares

Ashton Gate - 3.8 hectares

What's the next excuse?

Aberdeen are adamant that the ground and training facilities have to be next to each other for, erm, reasons which rules out Kings Links.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said:

We've had a worse set of fixtures, particularly with Aberdeen at home. Folk seem desperate to skate our crowds. 

Bare facts are they're higher than out historical crowds, and moving to McDiarmid hasn't harmed the crowds, or the club, which is the only relevance to this thread. 

Facts can't be compared to the 70/80's when Saints were 1. part time & 2. yo-yoing between the divisions. Since 1990 St Johnstone have been full time and predominantly a top flight Club.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, sjc said:

Facts can't be compared to the 70/80's when Saints were 1. part time & 2. yo-yoing between the divisions. Since 1990 St Johnstone have been full time and predominantly a top flight Club.

I'm not only comparing to the 70s. During the 60s we averaged about the same as we're doing. The early 90s were a blip, remove that from a graph of our average attendances and you'd see the current crowds are above the mean. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, sjc said:

St Johnstone pre Geoff Brown were verging on bankruptcy and playing part time at the wrong end of the seaside league.

The first season after the move (coinciding with winning promotion to the Premier Division) saw Saints average over 7000. These numbers were maintained under Totten but sharply fell away to what they are today......3000. Not great when you consider St Johnstone have just experienced their most sustained successful era in their history.

Former season ticket holders have jumped ship to support others. I blame gimmicks like the cash cow and slogans like "blood doesn't show on maroon shirts".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said:

I'm not only comparing to the 70s. During the 60s we averaged about the same as we're doing. The early 90s were a blip, remove that from a graph of our average attendances and you'd see the current crowds are above the mean. 

A "blip" which the Club should have built upon, not unlike the Cup win.

Anyway, St Johnstone moving to McDiarmid made sense at the time when hooliganism was still an issue and Councils didn't essentially want fans in town as well as out of town supermarkets & retail parks being in fashion. The demographics of football fans has changed to where you'd expect town & City centre businesses to be fighting to have their Clubs located centrally in order to capitalise on the trade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, tree house tam said:

Former season ticket holders have jumped ship to support others. I blame gimmicks like the cash cow and slogans like "blood doesn't show on maroon shirts".

I jumped ship on the entire Country mate!

My Mum & Dad still go on occasion though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, lubo_blaha said:

 


Kingsford will be the most remote major football stadium in the UK as it is outwith any centre of population and several miles from existing transport links. So yes, for a 20,000 capacity football stadium it is remote.

I backed it for similar reasons to most others, I wanted it to work for the club and recognised we need a new training and stadium solution after years of neglect from the board. Then I studied every document of the plans and saw that none of it added up, particularly the transport and matchday fan facilities. I’m happy to be proved wrong if/when the place opens but I can’t see it being an appealing experience, particularly for the 5-8000 that will use the shuttle buses every game.

 

:lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:lol:


I take it you’ve not read the transport plan then?

For a run of the mill league game (14k) 5800 fans are predicted to use shuttle buses. This rises to over 8000 for euro games.

This is all on the council website if you want to see it yourself. The DST have an interview with one of the directors which confirms this too.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, lubo_blaha said:

 


I take it you’ve not read the transport plan then?

For a run of the mill league game (14k) 5800 fans are predicted to use shuttle buses. This rises to over 8000 for euro games.

This is all on the council website if you want to see it yourself. The DST have an interview with one of the directors which confirms this too.

 

Yes because that's what *has to* go into the planning due to the councils ludicrous one parking space per 15 seats or whatever it is.

Reality is folk will drive and new parking spots will pop up. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes because that's what *has to* go into the planning due to the councils ludicrous one parking space per 15 seats or whatever it is.
Reality is folk will drive and new parking spots will pop up. 


That’s going to make the traffic situation even worse, half-empty buses and extra cars fighting for non-existent spaces.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, fatshaft said:

Yes because that's what *has to* go into the planning due to the councils ludicrous one parking space per 15 seats or whatever it is.

Reality is folk will drive and new parking spots will pop up. 

You are basically stating that AFC are submitting their plans on falsehoods.  

More cars = more walking = larger bridge = new plans = no stadium.  

Supporters of the stadium know that the transport plans are unworkable, opponents know they are unworkable and yet they have been submitted and defended time and time again.  At the same time people who are against the stadium and have questioned parking etc. are NIMBYs. :huh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, fatshaft said:

Yes because that's what *has to* go into the planning due to the councils ludicrous one parking space per 15 seats or whatever it is.

Reality is folk will drive and new parking spots will pop up. 

ahh the "fingers crossed" approach to planning!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, fatshaft said:

Yes because that's what *has to* go into the planning due to the councils ludicrous one parking space per 15 seats or whatever it is.

Reality is folk will drive and new parking spots will pop up. 

So your saying club is being economic with the truth when they claim the stadium will reduce car usage. Increased car usage would put them in breech of planing regulations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...