Advertise Here
You are here: darlofc.co.uk » Board index » The Uncovered Forums » Virtual Feethams
It is currently Tue Jun 27, 2017 3:37 am View unanswered posts | View active topics



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 142 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Apr 14, 2017 8:25 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 10:58 pm
Posts: 7228
Location: Liverpool
Team Supported: Darlington
was it £40k or £50k to buy and deliver from what I remember?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Apr 14, 2017 9:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 4:14 pm
Posts: 262
Team Supported: Darlington
Needs doing, simple as.

Any temp stand can be converted to permanent. It needs a roof and a base underneath it. Not only just at Durham CCC, Fulham is the best example (and obviously relevant to football stadiums). Even the Olympic Stadium where they have built forward, that is very similar to what is at Bishop. Obviously it has a roof over it, but the materials are virtually identical.

Did i read there's 390 seats in that? Absolute no brainer. Eventually buy another to go next to it behind the goal (It would easily fit before touching where the pipe is). Nearly 800 seats behind one goal is a more than sensible development. The obsession with chucking terracing in needs to go.

If we have hopes of going to the football league one day, at least two stands will need seating. It will be phenomenally difficult to do anything on the clubhouse side seats wise, and obviously the tinshed is at the other end. It is not short sighted to put seats behind that goal. It is necessary, and it is the cheapest option.

Get it done.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Apr 14, 2017 9:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 2:51 pm
Posts: 4376
Team Supported: Darlington
lo36789 wrote:
was it £40k or £50k to buy and deliver from what I remember?

I seem to have 50k in my head, although could be wrong.

I'm sure the temporary stand will come up at the fans forum, and so we may well find out then if it can be made permanent, at what cost, and whether it would change the long term development plans for BM. I don't know these answers at the moment, but I can't imagine the board would be looking at seats for 150k when it could be done for much cheaper than that, particularly as they had been looking at moving the seats over as a temporary solution anyway.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Apr 14, 2017 9:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 8:41 pm
Posts: 4407
Team Supported: Darlington
al_quaker wrote:
lo36789 wrote:
was it £40k or £50k to buy and deliver from what I remember?

I seem to have 50k in my head, although could be wrong.

I'm sure the temporary stand will come up at the fans forum, and so we may well find out then if it can be made permanent, at what cost, and whether it would change the long term development plans for BM. I don't know these answers at the moment, but I can't imagine the board would be looking at seats for 150k when it could be done for much cheaper than that, particularly as they had been looking at moving the seats over as a temporary solution anyway.


Also need to go through planning permission again if we change from the original plan.

It's not a simple as a few lads bringing the stuff over and putting up. You need a proper company to build it, with all the correct H&S certificates who no doubt give you some kind of fall back if anything goes wrong with the work.

Nothing wrong with someone asking at the forum but the idea that we pick it up, drop it off get it built anywhere we want and just make it permanent is pie in the sky. Best to calmly ask the question rather than think it's cheap as chips let's get it done.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Apr 14, 2017 10:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 15, 2016 1:35 pm
Posts: 209
Team Supported: Darlington
H1987 wrote:
Needs doing, simple as.

Any temp stand can be converted to permanent. It needs a roof and a base underneath it. Not only just at Durham CCC, Fulham is the best example (and obviously relevant to football stadiums). Even the Olympic Stadium where they have built forward, that is very similar to what is at Bishop. Obviously it has a roof over it, but the materials are virtually identical.

Did i read there's 390 seats in that? Absolute no brainer. Eventually buy another to go next to it behind the goal (It would easily fit before touching where the pipe is). Nearly 800 seats behind one goal is a more than sensible development. The obsession with chucking terracing in needs to go.

If we have hopes of going to the football league one day, at least two stands will need seating. It will be phenomenally difficult to do anything on the clubhouse side seats wise, and obviously the tinshed is at the other end. It is not short sighted to put seats behind that goal. It is necessary, and it is the cheapest option.

Get it done.


Do let us know how you grow the capacity of the ground to 4,000 then 5,000 after you've put seats on the open end.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Apr 15, 2017 12:24 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 4:14 pm
Posts: 262
Team Supported: Darlington
Ohhhh, can i play the smart arse game?

Do let us know how you're going to make the ground up to football league standards if you put a terrace behind that goal when two sides of the pitch need to be seated?

You only need 4k for the Football league, with "demonstrable ability to upgrade to 5k". You do however, need 2,000 seats. 1,000 is the bare minimum just for entry. We need seated areas on two sides of the pitch of up to 2,000. You also need to provide some seating allowance for away fans. If you put a terrace in behind that goal, that is not possible unless you're going to later pull it down, pull the tinshed down, or demolish the clubhouse. The only way you can ever get those seats is to run the seats from where they are now at the pipe all the way around to behind the goal where the pipe crosses there. You'll then have to put other terracing in elsewhere to get the capacity up. Whether you do it in the corner where the away fans would be at the moment might be an option, whether you carry it on around from the tinshed up until the pipe (you can probably get a 500 person terrace if you put a corner and a bit of terracing up until the pipe there).

Either way, we need more seats, they need to be affordable. Both in the short and the long term. If the board is responsible, they must be moved.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Apr 15, 2017 12:34 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 4:14 pm
Posts: 262
Team Supported: Darlington
Also, frankly, you could put half the temp stand the other side of the pipe near the tinshed, which again makes sense from a short term perspective, but at some point you're going to need to put seats behind that goal too, or come up with what will be a phenomenally expensive conversion on the clubhouse side (and good luck convincing the rugby club to allow it... they won't.)

Maybe, as the temp stand is in two small pieces, you could put them at either side of the clubhouse. Maybe. It'd probably be more expensive, and you'd have to move floodlights and dugouts to make sure people could see. Maybe you could put them in the corner where away fans would go, then build a terrace for home fans the other side of the pipe. Either way, you need seating on two sides of the pitch and provisions for away fans. It's insane, short sighted and bad fiscal sense to leave them. Look at this below. Obviously it's rough, but seriously, how do you fit the required seating in, in any other way, other than putting it behind the goal? Seats there is not short termism, if anything, a terrace is, unless there is another plan.

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Apr 15, 2017 3:35 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 15, 2016 1:35 pm
Posts: 209
Team Supported: Darlington
H1987 wrote:
Ohhhh, can i play the smart arse game?

Do let us know how you're going to make the ground up to football league standards if you put a terrace behind that goal when two sides of the pitch need to be seated?

You only need 4k for the Football league, with "demonstrable ability to upgrade to 5k". You do however, need 2,000 seats. 1,000 is the bare minimum just for entry. We need seated areas on two sides of the pitch of up to 2,000. You also need to provide some seating allowance for away fans. If you put a terrace in behind that goal, that is not possible unless you're going to later pull it down, pull the tinshed down, or demolish the clubhouse. The only way you can ever get those seats is to run the seats from where they are now at the pipe all the way around to behind the goal where the pipe crosses there. You'll then have to put other terracing in elsewhere to get the capacity up. Whether you do it in the corner where the away fans would be at the moment might be an option, whether you carry it on around from the tinshed up until the pipe (you can probably get a 500 person terrace if you put a corner and a bit of terracing up until the pipe there).

Either way, we need more seats, they need to be affordable. Both in the short and the long term. If the board is responsible, they must be moved.


You need 4,000 for the National League before you even start thinking about the FL. Yes, you always need to think further steps ahead but your proposal of putting seating on the open end won't even satisfy category A for NL. What's the point of configuring seating for Football League when you can't even hit capacity for the division below? Spending hundreds of thousands only to get demoted the season after promotion to the NL as you don't hit cat A?

Let's face it, we're light years from being anywhere near the FL - anything could change in the next 10 years but we've shown we're knocking on the door of the NL and need to fully consider how:

A) we can be eligible for promotion - this is a simple case of extending current seating with a slightly harder task of actually raising funding
B) ensuring we can stay in the division - this means getting capacity up to 4,000 - the easiest and cheapest way to do this is an open terrace on the current open end which runs 3/4 way along.

Beyond that to achieve the seating and the additional capacity to 5K there is no other option than to develop the club house side in some way shape or form or looking at re-routing pipes. There are quite obvious issues with all of that which casts the question as to whether the current site can support a FL ground. However putting all that aside the more relevant question is how you grow the operation to even come up with the funding to get anywhere near the FL, like I said - lots can/need to happen in the next 10 years for us even have to start to consider that.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Apr 15, 2017 5:29 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 7:51 am
Posts: 393
Team Supported: Darlington
It needs to be looked at by the board i no it won't be a easy move and we will have to get a proper company to build it. Another thing is how long are we have to wait untill we raise 150k we need seats and stand now if we are going to push for promotion next year again and these seats at bishop could be our answer


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Apr 15, 2017 7:16 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 8:41 pm
Posts: 4407
Team Supported: Darlington
Craig09 wrote:
It needs to be looked at by the board i no it won't be a easy move and we will have to get a proper company to build it. Another thing is how long are we have to wait untill we raise 150k we need seats and stand now if we are going to push for promotion next year again and these seats at bishop could be our answer


At the moment we need seats and stands as of 31st March 2018.

I presume the share purchase will start after Fridays fans forum and we try to raise at least 150k. We have planning permission for this stand so don't need to go through those hoops.

We would need to go through planning permission to bring the temp stand and make it permanent at BM. Costs seem to be at a minimum starting point of 80k for movement and roof before we make it permanent (if we can). Ask the question on Friday but I can see why it isn't in the current plan.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Apr 15, 2017 9:26 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 10:27 am
Posts: 621
Team Supported: Darlington
For me the biggest damage to come out of this affair is not even the issue of not being able to compete in the play-offs. It's the point that beforehand I and many Darlo fans knew that to sustain your place in the football league you would eventually need a 5,000 capacity with 2,000 seats. I would have assumed that the board were aware of this and as we're at BM for the long term, then we would have done due diligence on this and so long term BM could be updated to football league standards, and architects would have shown how. Now I'm not so sure. Are we stuck at a place which wouldn't support league football a few years down the line? Again, other posters would be quite within their rights to say 'Shut up. Of course the board will have done due diligence or we wouldn't have committed ourselves. Trust the club'. Now I guess no-one is sure. This is a question I'd like bringing up at the Fans Forum.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Apr 15, 2017 9:30 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 8:41 pm
Posts: 4407
Team Supported: Darlington
Vodka_Vic wrote:
For me the biggest damage to come out of this affair is not even the issue of not being able to compete in the play-offs. It's the point that beforehand I and many Darlo fans knew that to sustain your place in the football league you would eventually need a 5,000 capacity with 2,000 seats. I would have assumed that the board were aware of this and as we're at BM for the long term, then we would have done due diligence on this and so long term BM could be updated to football league standards, and architects would have shown how. Now I'm not so sure. Are we stuck at a place which wouldn't support league football a few years down the line? Again, other posters would be quite within their rights to say 'Shut up. Of course the board will have done due diligence or we wouldn't have committed ourselves. Trust the club'. Now I guess no-one is sure. This is a question I'd like bringing up at the Fans Forum.


Hopefully you will get a few answers on that on Friday. Thoughts are there for Category A and I presume some thoughts of Football League, however I think we have been busy getting in to BM whilst getting promoted faster than we imagined.

As people have said the off field developments have not kept up with MG and the teams on pitch developments.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Apr 15, 2017 9:40 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:04 pm
Posts: 10304
Team Supported: Darlington
I don't know if it's possible but is there some way to build a terrace that can later be converted to seating?

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

_________________
On Sunday April 29, 2012 at 10:25 pm, Darlo Cockney wrote:
Sadly some people have nothing better to do that invent rumours.

We will be playing at the arena again next season - fact.

Quakerz - if you actually attended games and spoke to people you might actually find our facts, rather than spreading s*** on this board.

DC


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Apr 15, 2017 9:49 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 10:58 pm
Posts: 7228
Location: Liverpool
Team Supported: Darlington
Spyman wrote:
I don't know if it's possible but is there some way to build a terrace that can later be converted to seating?


I was at Macclesfield last week and they had this (https://magyarsteve.files.wordpress.com ... 120146.jpg) at one end.

It was clearly a terrace at one point and now has seats in it. I can't think of any other reason to have it like this but to basically find a way to meet ground grading.

This 'looks' like quite a cost effective way to turn standing to seating. It also shows how much better terracing is for getting figures though - you are losing 2 standing spaces to accomodate a single seat (1 seat per 2 rows of terracing).


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Apr 15, 2017 9:50 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 6:32 pm
Posts: 20269
Team Supported: Darlington
H1987 wrote:
Needs doing, simple as.

Any temp stand can be converted to permanent. It needs a roof and a base underneath it. Not only just at Durham CCC, Fulham is the best example (and obviously relevant to football stadiums). Even the Olympic Stadium where they have built forward, that is very similar to what is at Bishop. Obviously it has a roof over it, but the materials are virtually identical.

Did i read there's 390 seats in that? Absolute no brainer. Eventually buy another to go next to it behind the goal (It would easily fit before touching where the pipe is). Nearly 800 seats behind one goal is a more than sensible development. The obsession with chucking terracing in needs to go.

If we have hopes of going to the football league one day, at least two stands will need seating. It will be phenomenally difficult to do anything on the clubhouse side seats wise, and obviously the tinshed is at the other end. It is not short sighted to put seats behind that goal. It is necessary, and it is the cheapest option.

Get it done.


There are 312 seats in the temporary stands at HP.

There are 294 or 297 seats, depending on who you are talking to, at BM.

I am convinced that the seats are identical at both grounds and that we already have a 312 seat kit, minus a few taken out to make gangways, at BM. Though of course I could be wrong.

But even if they ARE identical, and even if the seats at HP can be moved and converted to permanent, this still is not as cut and dried as you think. It's taken over your head and became an obsession!

What ARE the ACTUAL figures for moving the seats from HP to BM (if it can even be done). You don't know.

All you are doing is making up figures, comparing made up figures to other made up figures, and getting worked up about it.

First and foremost, we need FACTS.

We've heard around 150k to extend the stand at BM but how much is actually the stand? All of it, half of it? We don't know. We need a cost breakdown. We need FACTS.

What if (making up figures like you do) that the cost of the stand is only 70k? The rest of the 150k could be for other stuff. What if the majority of the (say, 70k) cost is putting foundations down and erecting a roof structure? What if the seats themselves are only a minor part of the cost? Lets just make up that the seats, which are crap as fuck to be honest, cost 20k of the 70k cost? Would that be reasonable? Lets say it would cost 21k to take apart, move and re-assemble the HP seats?

The thing is, I made all that up. But your argument is also based totally on guesswork, and to be honest in the absence of facts I'd say my argument is easily as plausible as yours.

We absolutely need concrete facts, and you absolutely need to drop it until we know proper costings.

_________________
Image

“Everybody knows where that club is going now, so I’m out of the way. They can carry on, it’s their club, they can keep it." - Raj Singh, 2017


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Apr 15, 2017 9:52 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 2:06 pm
Posts: 607
Team Supported: Darlington
Vodka_Vic wrote:
For me the biggest damage to come out of this affair is not even the issue of not being able to compete in the play-offs. It's the point that beforehand I and many Darlo fans knew that to sustain your place in the football league you would eventually need a 5,000 capacity with 2,000 seats. I would have assumed that the board were aware of this and as we're at BM for the long term, then we would have done due diligence on this and so long term BM could be updated to football league standards, and architects would have shown how. Now I'm not so sure. Are we stuck at a place which wouldn't support league football a few years down the line? Again, other posters would be quite within their rights to say 'Shut up. Of course the board will have done due diligence or we wouldn't have committed ourselves. Trust the club'. Now I guess no-one is sure. This is a question I'd like bringing up at the Fans Forum.


Which I have mentioned previously. Unless Blackwell can be redeveloped to Football League standards further down the line, then there will come a point where pouring money into Blackwell becomes a financial waste if this cannot be done. If this does become an issue then like or not a return to the Arena may well have to be considered. It more than meets the standards required for any level of football, unfortunately the running costs are definitely a lot higher and there is the issue of size and DMPRFC. A whole new set of agreements would have to be arranged, if indeed DMPRFC are still existing there, to share the Arena.

Granted this is possibly one of many scenarios much further down the line and there are more pressing matters in the club's immediate future! The main thing is the club is now based in the town again but all options need to be kept in mind.

_________________
"The world ain't all sunshine and rainbows. It is a very mean and nasty place and it will beat you to your knees and keep you there permanently if you let it. You, me, or nobody is gonna hit as hard as life. But it ain't how hard you hit; it's about how hard you can get hit, and keep moving forward. How much you can take, and keep moving forward. That's how winning is done!"


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Apr 15, 2017 9:55 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 6:32 pm
Posts: 20269
Team Supported: Darlington
And as for putting seats at the other end, they would need to be far greater than 6 deep in order to even get the capacity near 4k never mind 5k.

6 deep seats would need to be added to the existing stand, so whether we buy new or import existing seats from HP, that's where they need to go.

Then worry about the other end - I might agree that we will need to seat that eventually, actually, but right now it's not number one priority.

_________________
Image

“Everybody knows where that club is going now, so I’m out of the way. They can carry on, it’s their club, they can keep it." - Raj Singh, 2017


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Apr 15, 2017 9:58 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 10:58 pm
Posts: 7228
Location: Liverpool
Team Supported: Darlington
real_darlo_85 wrote:
Which I have mentioned previously. Unless Blackwell can be redeveloped to Football League standards further down the line


It has been confirmed that there is a longer term plan over how development of BM will look. Fact of the matter anything is really possible if you build backwards rather than sideways.

It would ultimately have been a bit of a waste of money but the tin shed could be pulled down and a replacement terrace built twice as deep...

Thing is I don't expect to be knocking on the football league door for 10-15 years at a push - anything built at the moment will have had a fairly decent ROI by that point anyway!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Apr 15, 2017 10:04 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 6:32 pm
Posts: 20269
Team Supported: Darlington
lo36789 wrote:
real_darlo_85 wrote:
Which I have mentioned previously. Unless Blackwell can be redeveloped to Football League standards further down the line


It has been confirmed that there is a longer term plan over how development of BM will look. Fact of the matter anything is really possible if you build backwards rather than sideways.

It would ultimately have been a bit of a waste of money but the tin shed could be pulled down and a replacement terrace built twice as deep...

Thing is I don't expect to be knocking on the football league door for 10-15 years at a push - anything built at the moment will have had a fairly decent ROI by that point anyway!


Over time the main stand could also prove to be a waste of money that needs pulling down and re-erecting at twice it's current size.

It's possible to buy roofed modular structures up to 13 seats deep from Arena Seating, we could have installed them one by one as finance allowed - I wonder what the costs were compared to how we've actually constructed the stand? Better to build the stand once rather than twice?

_________________
Image

“Everybody knows where that club is going now, so I’m out of the way. They can carry on, it’s their club, they can keep it." - Raj Singh, 2017


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Apr 15, 2017 10:06 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 8:41 pm
Posts: 4407
Team Supported: Darlington
Quakerz wrote:
H1987 wrote:
Needs doing, simple as.

Any temp stand can be converted to permanent. It needs a roof and a base underneath it. Not only just at Durham CCC, Fulham is the best example (and obviously relevant to football stadiums). Even the Olympic Stadium where they have built forward, that is very similar to what is at Bishop. Obviously it has a roof over it, but the materials are virtually identical.

Did i read there's 390 seats in that? Absolute no brainer. Eventually buy another to go next to it behind the goal (It would easily fit before touching where the pipe is). Nearly 800 seats behind one goal is a more than sensible development. The obsession with chucking terracing in needs to go.

If we have hopes of going to the football league one day, at least two stands will need seating. It will be phenomenally difficult to do anything on the clubhouse side seats wise, and obviously the tinshed is at the other end. It is not short sighted to put seats behind that goal. It is necessary, and it is the cheapest option.

Get it done.


There are 312 seats in the temporary stands at HP.

There are 294 or 297 seats, depending on who you are talking to, at BM.

I am convinced that the seats are identical at both grounds and that we already have a 312 seat kit, minus a few taken out to make gangways, at BM. Though of course I could be wrong.

But even if they ARE identical, and even if the seats at HP can be moved and converted to permanent, this still is not as cut and dried as you think. It's taken over your head and became an obsession!

What ARE the ACTUAL figures for moving the seats from HP to BM (if it can even be done). You don't know.

All you are doing is making up figures, comparing made up figures to other made up figures, and getting worked up about it.

First and foremost, we need FACTS.

We've heard around 150k to extend the stand at BM but how much is actually the stand? All of it, half of it? We don't know. We need a cost breakdown. We need FACTS.

What if (making up figures like you do) that the cost of the stand is only 70k? The rest of the 150k could be for other stuff. What if the majority of the (say, 70k) cost is putting foundations down and erecting a roof structure? What if the seats themselves are only a minor part of the cost? Lets just make up that the seats, which are crap as fuck to be honest, cost 20k of the 70k cost? Would that be reasonable? Lets say it would cost 21k to take apart, move and re-assemble the HP seats?

The thing is, I made all that up. But your argument is also based totally on guesswork, and to be honest in the absence of facts I'd say my argument is easily as plausible as yours.

We absolutely need concrete facts, and you absolutely need to drop it until we know proper costings.


Spot on. Nothing wrong with asking the question of why we can't move the seats from BM but to presume it is cheaper and quicker is just plain silly.

The figure of 30k to move the temp seats from Bishop to Darlo as they are was mentioned by someone who is linked to the club and the 50k for a roof at Bishop in 2012 was mentioned by a board member at the time.

I guess those figures can all be revisited but both were expected costs at the time.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Apr 15, 2017 11:29 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 7:51 am
Posts: 393
Team Supported: Darlington
HarrytheQuaker wrote:
lo36789 wrote:
Well so there's a start isn't it. £30k to transport and re-erect and then £50k off an old quote to add a roof.

£80k before you take in to account 5 years of inflation and potential changes in costs of raw materials on the roof.

Then the pitch works on top. You can start to see things edging towards £150k relatively quickly.
30 ffffffffffffing K what a load of bollox how much did it cost to buy and deliver to HP, lm sure not 30k



I was told each stand cost 20k wether thats true is another matter


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Apr 15, 2017 12:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:13 pm
Posts: 9160
Team Supported: Darlington
I presume that there is no reason why the tinshed couldn't be expanded, obviously it would be cheap?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Apr 15, 2017 12:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2009 8:55 pm
Posts: 3138
Location: Deep underground
Team Supported: The Almighty Darlo
I recall reading that the seats at HP were also in need of some repair work. I don't know what kind of repairs but I know it was mentioned on one of the previous occasions when this topic has been raised.

I think that helped form the decision to leave them at HP.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Apr 15, 2017 12:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2016 7:53 pm
Posts: 84
Team Supported: Darlington
If we managed to get a couple of friendly matches against Newcastle and Middlesbrough 1st teams or something and got a decent crowd that might fund half or over half the money for a stand.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Apr 15, 2017 12:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2015 9:19 pm
Posts: 374
Team Supported: Darlington
Knocking down the tin shed, replacing the existing seated stand? Why have we build structures that are not suitable to take us into the FL if that is the aim of the club? The whole thing was such a huge rush, even the board admitted that did it as cheap as quickly as they possibly could in order to get back to the town and retain the ability to stay in the NLN. Long term, BM does not look like somewhere that could host a 4-5000 capacity stadium. Shouldn't we think very carefully about the long term prospects before we go spending £150K on another structure that we'll have to pull down in 5 years if we want to get promoted? If BM is not a feasible project then it makes no sense to throw good money into it.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Apr 15, 2017 12:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 7:51 am
Posts: 393
Team Supported: Darlington
Ok lets forget about costs untill we no facts thats fine but my worry is us trying to raise 150k for these seats and have them bought and installed by march next year. The only way we can have seats installed in BM by next march is using the ones at bishop and upgrading them for hopefully a fraction of the 150k


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Apr 15, 2017 1:23 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2015 9:19 pm
Posts: 374
Team Supported: Darlington
real_darlo_85 wrote:
Which I have mentioned previously. Unless Blackwell can be redeveloped to Football League standards further down the line, then there will come a point where pouring money into Blackwell becomes a financial waste if this cannot be done. If this does become an issue then like or not a return to the Arena may well have to be considered. It more than meets the standards required for any level of football, unfortunately the running costs are definitely a lot higher and there is the issue of size and DMPRFC. A whole new set of agreements would have to be arranged, if indeed DMPRFC are still existing there, to share the Arena.

Granted this is possibly one of many scenarios much further down the line and there are more pressing matters in the club's immediate future! The main thing is the club is now based in the town again but all options need to be kept in mind.


I absolutely agree. If BM cannot be redeveloped to football league standards then we have no future there. There is no point pouring good money after bad. If the club can never get back to the football league then it dies, we must always retain that goal. We need a clear and honest discussion about the potential of BM. If it can never realistically be developed then I would rather play at the Arena for the next 50 years.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Apr 15, 2017 1:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 4:46 pm
Posts: 475
Team Supported: Swansea (and Darlo of course)
Yarblockos wrote:
real_darlo_85 wrote:
Which I have mentioned previously. Unless Blackwell can be redeveloped to Football League standards further down the line, then there will come a point where pouring money into Blackwell becomes a financial waste if this cannot be done. If this does become an issue then like or not a return to the Arena may well have to be considered. It more than meets the standards required for any level of football, unfortunately the running costs are definitely a lot higher and there is the issue of size and DMPRFC. A whole new set of agreements would have to be arranged, if indeed DMPRFC are still existing there, to share the Arena.

Granted this is possibly one of many scenarios much further down the line and there are more pressing matters in the club's immediate future! The main thing is the club is now based in the town again but all options need to be kept in mind.


I absolutely agree. If BM cannot be redeveloped to football league standards then we have no future there. There is no point pouring good money after bad. If the club can never get back to the football league then it dies, we must always retain that goal. We need a clear and honest discussion about the potential of BM. If it can never realistically be developed then I would rather play at the Arena for the next 50 years.


This... Sums up my feelings on the issue as well...

If you make it clear we can never play in the FL, Darlo dies... Simple as that.

We keep hearing that there are plans to make BM a FL ground but the maths dont add up at all...

I'd like to know what safeguards were put in place so that if it wasnt a reality, we could get out of the 25 year lease, even if that meant a reasonable settlement figure.

Regarding the arena, this issue of primacy of tenure... It isn't written in the rules of the NL rugby. There was a case where the Aviva Premiership tried to block London Welsh being promoted from the NL because they didnt have it at the Kassam... Nottingham and Bristol have both played in the National League without primacy of tenure, the latter when Rovers played in the Conference Premier.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Apr 15, 2017 2:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:13 pm
Posts: 9160
Team Supported: Darlington
Given Mowden's financial issues, I'm sure they'd be more than amenable for us to go back to the Arena.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Apr 15, 2017 3:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2015 9:19 pm
Posts: 374
Team Supported: Darlington
Darlo_Pete wrote:
Given Mowden's financial issues, I'm sure they'd be more than amenable for us to go back to the Arena.


The downside to this, as someone mentioned, is that we'd have to pay the FSIF grant back. Not sure if that's true, but it would saddle us with a big debt. We could take the hit and move to the Arena, which might ease our problems in the long term, while "saving up" for a ground that is fit for purpose.

However, if Mowden Park do have big financial problems I'd worry about the long term security of moving there. What happens if they go bust, are we homeless again?

The move to BM was clearly rushed, the stands seem inadequate and difficult to expand. There has to be a feasible long term plan for making the ground up to football league standard. Until we know that this is actually possible at BM we should not throw any more money into it.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 142 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 9 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group