New Stadium - The pessimist's view... (2 Viewers)

ms639 · Jul 21, 2020

Before I get hammered with abuse, I just want to state that my sincere hope is that this has been well thought through and is a viable long term solution for us but I just wanted to put the alternative view out there.

I can't help but feel that this is a smokescreen for our inability to negotiate a deal to stay at the Ricoh. It really feels like this carrot is being dangled as a pre-cursor to an announcement that we will not be playing in Coventry for the forseeable. What has actually been announced today? 2 entities have announced that they are looking into a new ground for Coventry City at a determined site, it is nothing more than that. No planning permission, no accurate timescales, no clear source of funding. What we have is a paper thin promise.

If it doesn't come to fruition there are so many get out clauses for both parties and whilst we are playing outside of coventry it is something for SISU to fall back on to appease the fans. That means for potentially the next 5 years we'll be tenants in another clubs ground with: limited matchday revenue, no events revenue, limited F+B revenue, all whilst trying to compete in a league whereby the top clubs are paying player £50+k per week.

Remember the shortsightedness of our highfield road to ricoh move, we made an assumption that we'd still be a premier league club and the reality was that when we got relegated to div 1 and didn't bounce back, the model was unsustainable and the ricoh became a money pit. How are we mitigating the same thing happening again? We're looking into building a ground in 5 years time having only just got back into the championship, potentially taking on huge debts, with limited revenue all whilst facing the very real risk of not being able to compete in the championship (MR has stated our budget will already be the lowest)

Before everyone gets giddy we should face the real possibility that: this is all just a smokescreen for a short term announcement that we won't be playing in cov; that it impacts our revenue in a highly monetised league and it exposes us to huge financial risk when the reality is we could well be a L1 club again next year.

A lot of people being optimistic about the Uni putting their name to it here, again I can see why but let's look at their challenges 1/6 of Warwick Uni revenue comes from overseas students, in the wake and aftermath of a global pandemic it will be more difficult than ever to attract overseas students (particularly from th efar east where a large proportion come from) in addition there is no longevity in uni's keeping their fees the same whilst all teaching is being moved online, there is already uproar in the student population about this. They have to tell a story of positivity and investment. Investment attracts more investment and whilst there is the possibility of the ground go ahead they will see income from associated streams.

*** prepares for abuse ***

mr_monkey · Jul 21, 2020

ms639 said:
Before I get hammered with abuse, I just want to state that my sincere hope is that this has been well thought through and is a viable long term solution for us but I just wanted to put the alternative view out there.

I can't help but feel that this is a smokescreen for our inability to negotiate a deal to stay at the Ricoh. It really feels like this carrot is being dangled as a pre-cursor to an announcement that we will not be playing in Coventry for the forseeable. What has actually been announced today? 2 entities have announced that they are looking into a new ground for Coventry City at a determined site, it is nothing more than that. No planning permission, no accurate timescales, no clear source of funding. What we have is a paper thin promise.

If it doesn't come to fruition there are so many get out clauses for both parties and whilst we are playing outside of coventry it is something for SISU to fall back on to appease the fans. That means for potentially the next 5 years we'll be tenants in another clubs ground with: limited matchday revenue, no events revenue, limited F+B revenue, all whilst trying to compete in a league whereby the top clubs are paying player £50+k per week.

Remember the shortsightedness of our highfield road to ricoh move, we made an assumption that we'd still be a premier league club and the reality was that when we got relegated to div 1 and didn't bounce back, the model was unsustainable and the ricoh became a money pit. How are we mitigating the same thing happening again? We're looking into building a ground in 5 years time having only just got back into the championship, potentially taking on huge debts, with limited revenue all whilst facing the very real risk of not being able to compete in the championship (MR has stated our budget will already be the lowest)

Before everyone gets giddy we should face the real possibility that: this is all just a smokescreen for a short term announcement that we won't be playing in cov; that it impacts our revenue in a highly monetised league and it exposes us to huge financial risk when the reality is we could well be a L1 club again next year.

*** prepares for abuse ***

No abuse but the way to think about it is that if it was just a smokescreen why would Warwick uni get involved and make sure the joint statement. If it was just fisher or boddy making the statement independently I'd feel the same as you but the way it has been done gives me much more hope

Also the Ricoh move was more about Richardson, his ego and helping out his mates, completely over ambitious for what we needed at the time

Sky Blue Pete · Jul 21, 2020

Not at all it’s perfectly reasonable what you say

Which is why the closer relationships that we hope are possible with the club and owners and supporters means that reasonable questions can receive reasonable answers and be assured things are progressing as expected

Nick · Jul 21, 2020

I don't think you would get abuse for being pessimistic about it, most people should be.

The one promising thing I can think of is that Warwick Uni won't be making statements for shits and giggles for a smokescreen.

If it means 5 years at St Andrews IF something then starts to get rolling then let's go for it. That's if progress is actually made on it.

You do make it sound as if it is entirely down to the club if we can play at the Ricoh though.

ms639 · Jul 21, 2020

mr_monkey said:
No abuse but the way to think about it is that if it was just a smokescreen why would Warwick uni get involved and make sure the joint statement. If it was just fisher or boddy making the statement independently I'd feel the same as you but the way it has been done gives me much more hope

Also the Ricoh move was more about Richardson, his ego and helping out his mates, completely over ambitious for what we needed at the time

You can see why the Uni would make the same statement no? At a time whereby 1/6 of their revenue comes from overseas students, a global pandemic is impacting students from overseas, there is uproar in the student population that tuition fees are remaining the same whilst all teaching is being moved online. The uni has just as much of a need to build a story of growth and investment as the club do

mr_monkey · Jul 21, 2020

ms639 said:
You can see why the Uni would make the same statement no? At a time whereby 1/6 of their revenue comes from overseas students, a global pandemic is impacting students from overseas, there is uproar in the student population that tuition fees are remaining the same whilst all teaching is being moved online. The uni has just as much of a need to build a story of growth and investment as the club do

That's a bit tin foil hat for me mate

Nick · Jul 21, 2020

ms639 said:
You can see why the Uni would make the same statement no? At a time whereby 1/6 of their revenue comes from overseas students, a global pandemic is impacting students from overseas, there is uproar in the student population that tuition fees are remaining the same whilst all teaching is being moved online. The uni has just as much of a need to build a story of growth and investment as the club do

Do you think that students are going to look for an announcement about a football stadium that may not happen before choosing to go there? It seems a bit extreme.

They may well have political motives to announce it though, time will tell.

It is only right to be very cynical about it until progress happens but it's the Uni involvement that makes it slightly more promising for me.

Liquid Gold · Jul 21, 2020

ms639 said:
You can see why the Uni would make the same statement no? At a time whereby 1/6 of their revenue comes from overseas students, a global pandemic is impacting students from overseas, there is uproar in the student population that tuition fees are remaining the same whilst all teaching is being moved online. The uni has just as much of a need to build a story of growth and investment as the club do

Which means that a build is more likely too.

SBT · Jul 21, 2020

Hard to disagree with the OP, and I think the reception for this announcement would be a lot different if it had come off the back of another middling season in L1.

I think a deal of this nature with Warwick is the kind of thing that can easily be scaled back to becoming a state-of-the-art sport facility for just the university, in the event that our circumstances change. The Ricoh, with its concerts and casinos, has been a major part of SISU's long term strategy for owning this team, so it represents a huge shift on their part to essentially write that off and try to build something new from scratch. If SISU get a sniff that the Ricoh might be back in play, I doubt they'll be as enthusiastic about building a modular stadium in the sticks.

Anyway, I'm not going to get really excited until I see the plans for the retractable pitch.

ms639 · Jul 21, 2020

Liquid Gold said:
Which means that a build is more likely too.

not necessarily, the possibility alone is enough for the uni to attract other sources of investment. They too will use the possibility of the stadium as a carrot to r+d investment and infrastructure investment

Otis · Jul 21, 2020

I am indeed skeptical it will ever get built at all, but also too in terms of , if it ever were to be go ahead, it will be a cheap, botch job, with far too many corners cut and it will be yet another thing for us to moan about.

So many people used to moan like hell about HR and it being cold and soulless and like a library, so would very much expect the same here too.

I don't think it will be built anyway. Talk is cheap.

Nick · Jul 21, 2020

ms639 said:
not necessarily, the possibility alone is enough for the uni to attract other sources of investment. They too will use the possibility of the stadium as a carrot to r+d investment and infrastructure investment

That ties in with this though:

It is hoped much of the funding would come from ‘enabling development’ such as retail or student accommodation.

Let's face it, massive investors are going to want more than just a joint statement as proof before throwing millions away.

ms639 · Jul 21, 2020

Nick said:
Do you think that students are going to look for an announcement about a football stadium that may not happen before choosing to go there? It seems a bit extreme.

They may well have political motives to announce it though, time will tell.

It is only right to be very cynical about it until progress happens but it's the Uni involvement that makes it slightly more promising for me.

Nope I don't think students necessarily will but it will attract investment from associated fields, they will be able to invest heavily in faculty and research and development to make themselves a more attractive proposition overall. The article already cites sport science and hospitality and leisure as growing disciplines, they will be able to access government funding to build these functions out

ajsccfc · Jul 21, 2020

ms639 said:
You can see why the Uni would make the same statement no? At a time whereby 1/6 of their revenue comes from overseas students, a global pandemic is impacting students from overseas, there is uproar in the student population that tuition fees are remaining the same whilst all teaching is being moved online. The uni has just as much of a need to build a story of growth and investment as the club do

This doesn't really ring true, the University already have ongoing projects that cover growth and expansion to the point that they wouldn't need to bother with this. One thing that would help is that it would further existing plans for improvements to local infrastructure, but nothing would be entered into without the intention of it actually coming to fruition.

Nick · Jul 21, 2020

ms639 said:
Nope I don't think students necessarily will but it will attract investment from associated fields, they will be able to invest heavily in faculty and research and development to make themselves a more attractive proposition overall. The article already cites sport science and hospitality and leisure as growing disciplines, they will be able to access government funding to build these functions out

Do you think that's funding / investment will be given just based on the statement or would they want concrete evidence?

ms639 · Jul 21, 2020

Nick said:
Do you think that's funding / investment will be given just based on the statement or would they want concrete evidence?

You'd like to think it's the latter but working in tech I've seen so many shit business garner millions in investment from half baked pitches. With further education as well there is the philanthropic element whereby investment is not necessarily tied back to direct financial return but local economic prosperity more generally. This is a bit of a rabbit hole we could carry on down but what I'm saying is that there is definitely motive for the uni to get onboard with this even with a huge degree of uncertainty

Frostie · Jul 21, 2020

Warwick is one of the fastest developing Universities around with loads of multi million pound works already ongoing & upcoming.
Not sure they'd need to invent a stadium story.

cc84cov · Jul 21, 2020

Nick said:
I don't think you would get abuse for being pessimistic about it, most people should be.

The one promising thing I can think of is that Warwick Uni won't be making statements for shits and giggles for a smokescreen.

If it means 5 years at St Andrews IF something then starts to get rolling then let's go for it. That's if progress is actually made on it.

You do make it sound as if it is entirely down to the club if we can play at the Ricoh though.

I agree I’ll take 5 years at St Andrews to finally have our ow stadium

ms639 · Jul 21, 2020

Frostie said:
Warwick is one of the fastest developing Universities around with loads of multi million pound works already ongoing & upcoming.
Not sure they'd need to invent a stadium story.

Multi-millions of investment in a world pre global pandemic. Who knows what this has done to that proposed investment

Nick · Jul 21, 2020

ms639 said:
You'd like to think it's the latter but working in tech I've seen so many shit business garner millions in investment from half baked pitches. With further education as well there is the philanthropic element whereby investment is not necessarily tied back to direct financial return but local economic prosperity more generally. This is a bit of a rabbit hole we could carry on down but what I'm saying is that there is definitely motive for the uni to get onboard with this even with a huge degree of uncertainty

Warwick Uni is hardly a startup desperate to pitch things though is it?

Of course, people should be cynical. It would be silly not to and it may turn out that it's political. If it IS just political, Warwick Uni would be a good thing to have on our side though.

ms639 · Jul 21, 2020

Nick said:
Warwick Uni is hardly a startup desperate to pitch things though is it?

Of course, people should be cynical. It would be silly not to and it may turn out that it's political. If it IS just political, Warwick Uni would be a good thing to have on our side though.

Yep mate, just a personal view and based on a lot of 'theory' but so is the stadium announcement. Let's hope I'm entirely wrong!

ajsccfc · Jul 21, 2020

ms639 said:
Multi-millions of investment in a world pre global pandemic. Who knows what this has done to that proposed investment

We've been told - things not already signed off are delayed, numerous projects past that point carrying on. Arts Centre upgrade, new Humanities building among others all going on as we speak. There's really no sense in them putting their name to anything that isn't legitimate. That's not to say it will definitely happen as things like the California campus ended up being a dead pursuit, but they are more rare than not.

cc84cov · Jul 21, 2020

My pal is the facilities manager up there just asked if he’s heard much his end yet

Nick · Jul 21, 2020

ms639 said:
Yep mate, just a personal view and based on a lot of 'theory' but so is the stadium announcement. Let's hope I'm entirely wrong!

May well be right, I'd be a lot more cynical if it was just Fisher blubbering about some shite though.

fatso · Jul 21, 2020

ms639 said:
Before I get hammered with abuse, I just want to state that my sincere hope is that this has been well thought through and is a viable long term solution for us but I just wanted to put the alternative view out there.

I can't help but feel that this is a smokescreen for our inability to negotiate a deal to stay at the Ricoh. It really feels like this carrot is being dangled as a pre-cursor to an announcement that we will not be playing in Coventry for the forseeable. What has actually been announced today? 2 entities have announced that they are looking into a new ground for Coventry City at a determined site, it is nothing more than that. No planning permission, no accurate timescales, no clear source of funding. What we have is a paper thin promise.

If it doesn't come to fruition there are so many get out clauses for both parties and whilst we are playing outside of coventry it is something for SISU to fall back on to appease the fans. That means for potentially the next 5 years we'll be tenants in another clubs ground with: limited matchday revenue, no events revenue, limited F+B revenue, all whilst trying to compete in a league whereby the top clubs are paying player £50+k per week.

Remember the shortsightedness of our highfield road to ricoh move, we made an assumption that we'd still be a premier league club and the reality was that when we got relegated to div 1 and didn't bounce back, the model was unsustainable and the ricoh became a money pit. How are we mitigating the same thing happening again? We're looking into building a ground in 5 years time having only just got back into the championship, potentially taking on huge debts, with limited revenue all whilst facing the very real risk of not being able to compete in the championship (MR has stated our budget will already be the lowest)

Before everyone gets giddy we should face the real possibility that: this is all just a smokescreen for a short term announcement that we won't be playing in cov; that it impacts our revenue in a highly monetised league and it exposes us to huge financial risk when the reality is we could well be a L1 club again next year.

A lot of people being optimistic about the Uni putting their name to it here, again I can see why but let's look at their challenges 1/6 of Warwick Uni revenue comes from overseas students, in the wake and aftermath of a global pandemic it will be more difficult than ever to attract overseas students (particularly from th efar east where a large proportion come from) in addition there is no longevity in uni's keeping their fees the same whilst all teaching is being moved online, there is already uproar in the student population about this. They have to tell a story of positivity and investment. Investment attracts more investment and whilst there is the possibility of the ground go ahead they will see income from associated streams.

*** prepares for abuse ***

Some very valid points, an announcement of nothing concrete, is hardly something to get over excited about, and I cant help but think it may be an announcement to give leverage to something else, but maybe I'm too cynical!
In the short term we desperately need to return to the Ricoh and support the excellent work being done by MR.
As for the proposed new ground, surely any capacity under 30k would show a lack of ambition, if we accept we wont fill a 30k ground often enough, then maybe the championship is our new permanent level.

Earlsdon_Skyblue1 · Jul 21, 2020

Otis said:
I am indeed skeptical it will ever get built at all, but also too in terms of , if it ever were to be go ahead, it will be a cheap, botch job, with far too many corners cut and it will be yet another thing for us to moan about.

So many people used to moan like hell about HR and it being cold and soulless and like a library, so would very much expect the same here too.

I don't think it will be built anyway. Talk is cheap.

You won't go anyway, so I assume your negativity is some kind of self-justification for it.

Frostie · Jul 21, 2020

ms639 said:
Multi-millions of investment in a world pre global pandemic. Who knows what this has done to that proposed investment

Understand where you're coming from but through my work I'm actually involved with a couple of the projects & there is no talk of delaying. There will be minimum of £130m worth of projects delivered next year & new planning applications are still being submitted.

shmmeee · Jul 21, 2020

Nick said:
I don't think you would get abuse for being pessimistic about it, most people should be.

The one promising thing I can think of is that Warwick Uni won't be making statements for shits and giggles for a smokescreen.

If it means 5 years at St Andrews IF something then starts to get rolling then let's go for it. That's if progress is actually made on it.

You do make it sound as if it is entirely down to the club if we can play at the Ricoh though.

Just playing devils advocate here, but everyone said the same about the last Stadium of Joy. Sandra Garlick is sensible, architects wont do it for no reason, etc etc.

Warwick Uni have announced a partnership, tomorrow that partnership could end with no fruits.

In reality until land changes hands and a spade goes in the ground it’s all talk and very little financial or reputational cost for any party.

As I say, I hope this is right and Warwick Uni always seemed like the right place, but let’s not pretend we haven’t been here before. Long way to go.

Sky Blue Harry H · Jul 21, 2020

Even if The Ricoh is Plan A, if Wasps are playing silly buggers, we've always wanted this/another option, I really like Dave Boddy, and since he's been on board, I'm happy that whatever strategy is being undertaken it's in the interest of the club. Will be happy with the Ricoh on decent terms or a new stadium if necessary.

ms639 · Jul 21, 2020

Frostie said:
Understand where you're coming from but through my work I'm actually involved with a couple of the projects & there is no talk of delaying. There will be minimum of £130m worth of projects delivered next year & new planning applications are still being submitted.

Fair play mate, if you have the inside scoop I'm not gonna argue!

Nick · Jul 21, 2020

shmmeee said:
Just playing devils advocate here, but everyone said the same about the last Stadium of Joy. Sandra Garlick is sensible, architects wont do it for no reason, etc etc.

Warwick Uni have announced a partnership, tomorrow that partnership could end with no fruits.

In reality until land changes hands and a spade goes in the ground it’s all talk and very little financial or reputational cost for any party.

As I say, I hope this is right and Warwick Uni always seemed like the right place, but let’s not pretend we haven’t been here before. Long way to go.

Did they say the same or is it one of those assumptions like when you say I said things I hadn't?

Even if it is just a political move, I am happy with Warwick Uni on our site rather than just Fisher. Duggins won't start acting the dick against them.

Where have I heard "Stadium of Joy" before?

Earlsdon_Skyblue1 · Jul 21, 2020

I would always take an announcement like this with a pinch of salt, but having Warwick Uni on our side does give it more substance. I think the club has also changed direction off the pitch in terms of management so I doubt they would be making this all up. The absence of Fisher in this announcement gives it more credit for one.

I suspect we will be at St Andrews indefinitely and I would expect this announcement has been timed accordingly to soften the blow from that. If this does really take off though, and I think there is more reason to believe this more than anything else, then it could be absolutely phenomenal for the club.

The uni have been building stuff for fun in the last 10 years and seem to have a bucket of money. There are so many lessons from the Ricoh to take into account and I hope there will be a committee of fans involved in the project. I.e. making sure it isn't a soulless bowl etc. I for one would be happy to be involved with that.

It is very easy to tell apart the people who are genuinely apprehensive of this news from the ones that have no intention of going to games and just want to slate it at any opportunity.

Equally to some the thought of Wasps and the Council getting done over has roughed a few feathers. I love it.

shmmeee · Jul 21, 2020

Nick said:
Did they say the same or is it one of those assumptions like when you say I said things I hadn't?

Even if it is just a political move, I am happy with Warwick Uni on our site rather than just Fisher. Duggins won't start acting the dick against them.

Where have I heard "Stadium of Joy" before?

Not here for a fight mate, as I say just playing devils advocate and I hope this happens. But yes, I do remember people saying that the presence of third parties was proof it was serious last time.

Arguably we got far further last time all round, plans drawn up, fans forum set up, etc etc. As I say it costs very little to do this stuff up until land changes hands, even then there’s planning and even then there’s development. It seems we’ve gone back to the drawing board in terms of design. We don’t have land identified. We are very much at step one. That is welcome but let’s be honest about that.

Somerset Sky Blue · Jul 21, 2020

fatso said:
Some very valid points, an announcement of nothing concrete, is hardly something to get over excited about, and I cant help but think it may be an announcement to give leverage to something else, but maybe I'm too cynical!
In the short term we desperately need to return to the Ricoh and support the excellent work being done by MR.
As for the proposed new ground, surely any capacity under 30k would show a lack of ambition, if we accept we wont fill a 30k ground often enough, then maybe the championship is our new permanent level.

I think the 20k or 30k capacity are quite sensible at present....
We've not had many seasons (any?) when our average was 30k.
We've not been in the top flight for years - we will have lost plenty of fans in-between this time.
Having a ground (say 45k) which is full three times a season but half empty for other games would be soulless (thinking Ricoh here!).
If we get to the premier, most clubs seem to rely on other revenue streams.
Finally, if we were in the premier for ten plus years I'm sure we could redevelop part of the ground!
A ground of 20k which can be increased to 30k is ambitious for where we are (especially in terms of paying for it).

mr_monkey · Jul 21, 2020

shmmeee said:
Not here for a fight mate, as I say just playing devils advocate and I hope this happens. But yes, I do remember people saying that the presence of third parties was proof it was serious last time.

Arguably we got far further last time all round, plans drawn up, fans forum set up, etc etc. As I say it costs very little to do this stuff up until land changes hands, even then there’s planning and even then there’s development. It seems we’ve gone back to the drawing board in terms of design. We don’t have land identified. We are very much at step one. That is welcome but let’s be honest about that.

As it was so long ago I can't remember if there was specific land named last time? This time we have a specific area and a specific partner named publicly which I think makes it less pie in the sky than last time (but obviously I'm sceptical until I'm in my sky blue seat)

New Stadium - The pessimist's view... (2 Viewers)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency