Interview with Johnston on Official Website

Open now for discussion of all things Darlo!

Moderators: botrash, mikkyx, charlie, uncovered

H1987
Posts: 1549
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 4:14 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Interview with Johnston on Official Website

Post by H1987 » Mon Dec 30, 2019 5:25 pm

super_les_mcjannet wrote:
Mon Dec 30, 2019 4:33 pm
Vodka_Vic wrote:
Mon Dec 30, 2019 4:08 pm
I'm interested to know about this plot of land. A number of people have said it's complete pie in the sky, but DJ is not a fantasist, and wouldn't consider it if it was a no-go.
The plot of land exists, it’s the finances to build on it that are the missing bit.
Exactly. That is the pie in the sky bit. I’m not doubting the land exists. I am doubting the ability for the club to do it, we don’t have the hope of raising that money.

As for whoever said the next level will cost us millions - NO IT WON’T. We can be promoted with Blackwell as it stands. It just needs an official capacity if 4,000 to stay there. It would take some work, but nothing outrageous.

If you’re talking about the football league, well that’s not the level above, we are nowhere near that level right now, and we would likely have needed large scale investment to get to that level. Worrying about the football league when we are barely troubling the playoffs in this division isn’t all that far removed from trying to build a premier league sized stadium for a league two club. It’s not based in reality.

Ghost_Of_1883
Posts: 716
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2018 9:33 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Interview with Johnston on Official Website

Post by Ghost_Of_1883 » Mon Dec 30, 2019 5:36 pm

H1987 wrote:
Mon Dec 30, 2019 1:31 pm


Honestly, we add some extra seats to the corner (an extra 150?) and a terrace the capacity of the tinshed (ok it can only go 2/3 of the pitch, so instead you make it 12-13 rows deep rather than 8 to achieve this - whoever responsible can do the sums) and you'll hit 4,000 easily
No, I'm afraid we won't make it easily. It can be done but it's going to take a bit more than plonking a 1,000 capacity terrace in the open end.

If you build a 1,000 capacity terrace at the open end you are not adding 1,000 to the capacity, because the hard standing already has a capacity of around 700 and you would lose most of that. True 1/3rd of it would remain hard standing as the terrace would not be full width, so you'd maybe have around 250 in hard standing and 1,000 on the terrace - so 1,250 in total, as opposed to the current 700 or so. But that's only 550 extra capacity.

Another 150 seats into the corner? Sure lets blow another 100k on extending the wankest stand I've ever set eyes on. I think though, that "just" gets us to a total usable capacity of 4,000 - and certainly there would be more elevated standing and sitting which is a bonus. But not exactly easy is it?

But here is the problem - once you get to the National League you can no longer use hard standing capacity towards the ground grading requirements. So you have around 250 hard standing left in the open end - subtract that. Oh yeah, the clubhouse side, that's got to be 800/900 easy - subtract that.

So we would have spent a lot of money extending the stand and building a terrace, as well as having to spend all the extra on more turnstiles, exits etc, and we'd technically have a 4,000 ground - but in reality only 3,000 or just under would count towards a cat A ground.

We'd need to find another 1,000 and we can't develop the clubhouse side. All we'd have is the gap between the Tin Shed and pipe exclusion zone to play with, to fit an extra 1,000+ in. So we'd have to develop that. Big terrace? More money. Still won't have enough seats if we ever need 1,000 or 2,000. And it just goes on and on. Knock down the existing stands and replace with bigger? More money. We'd be well into millions before you know it. Move the pipe? Over a million to move it, before we do any work. But at least we'd have the full footprint of 3 sides to play with.

This ground development is a big problem and far from being a cinch.

And let's say we do manage to get it to 4,000, what if we're in the National League and have a freak overachieving season and are on the verge of promotion to the EFL? More money to find, but I'm doubtful we could ever get BM to the required standard.

And what about our agreement with DRFC? It's not a tenancy, it's a license to use the ground for matches, a few hours a week. It's not a very secure arrangement for us. People have mentioned that it might be relatively easy for us to get out of if we want to move - I don't know how true that is, but if it is true, you might wonder if it's also easy for DRFC to get out of as well.

Even if the license runs full length, what's stopping DRFC kicking us out at the end? Once they've paid their debts off, paid their share of the initial ground improvements off, got some money in the bank, as an amateur club their costs will be quite low. So they get financially secure, they get a massively improved ground - nice if their club happens to progress up a couple of leagues - they don't need us then.

At the same time, I'm hearing that the Arena is quite literally falling apart with all of the steel work rusted. I'm also hearing that despite all of their best efforts MPRFC are in dire straits and losing money. They need the SV to save them basically. As much as I'm always for dialling A - I'm not sure about dialling A to play on a placcy pitch in a falling down stadium, worrying whether the landlords will manage to remain in business.

This looks like a proper shitt sandwich either way.
We are Darlo! We know our shitt! If we say it's 1-2-0-1-1-3-0-1-1 then you better believe it! La la la oo, la la la oo (clap, clap, clap, clap)

Vodka_Vic
Posts: 1944
Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 10:27 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Interview with Johnston on Official Website

Post by Vodka_Vic » Mon Dec 30, 2019 6:32 pm

I'm talking about the financing of the plot of land when I say that DJ isn't a fantasist. He's obviously got plans for how it'll be funded.
Basically, DJ is in the process of doing the costings as to how we get self-sufficient and back in the EFL. I certainly think the bottom line will be being in the SV. This will need to be voted on by the DFCSG members, many of whom post on here. Given the strength of feeling against the Arena by people, some of whom are even board members, it really isn't a done deal.
I think that the plans in any case will come a bit later than anticipated, as DJ is visiting Walsall in the New Year to get some costings and I'm sure these will form part of the proposal.

PierremontQuaker03
Posts: 1839
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:53 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Interview with Johnston on Official Website

Post by PierremontQuaker03 » Mon Dec 30, 2019 7:58 pm

What is just as important as getting the new stadium is that the running costs (overheads) of the new stadium need to be as slick as possible. The Arena is far to expensive to run and maybe Mowden have found a way to make it work but it is a risky business. While I share many of the concerns of people on this board about BM there are certain advantages of being a tenant, the biggest one being that we have football in our town again. I do quite like going to BM as it feels like a non league ground whereas I never felt comfortable in the Arena.
“If you can't hit a driver, don't.”
Greg Norman

H1987
Posts: 1549
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 4:14 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Interview with Johnston on Official Website

Post by H1987 » Mon Dec 30, 2019 9:05 pm

This really isn't that difficult to grasp. Hard standing is 4 deep. If you build a 12 step terrace, that's 8 people more deep. So lets say you have an area of 400 hard standing, with the 12 step terrace it can now hold those original 400 in the front 4 rows, plus another 800 behind them who previously could not fit or be counted towards capacity. This goes directly onto the capacity the deeper you make the terrace. It's not difficult to get your head around. A 12 step terrace is not particularly large. The old tinshed was 13. Maybe you need to make it a 15 step terrace, even if you do - that is not that big a terrace. The old south stand at Feethams must've been about 25 for christs sakes.

You cannot make any rational argument that Blackwell Meadows cannot be expanded beyond 4,000. As for hard standing, it can be converted simply with additional standing barriers to there is a walkway around the pitch. The idea that we'd lose half of the ground if we went up is a total nonsense statement. Just look at some of the existing clubs in the conference national. Maidenhead, Chorley, Harrogate, Dover, Sutton and a bunch of others all have these areas. I've been to Sutton, it's crapper than Blackwell. It meets the requirements in some areas because theres's simply a set back rail from the current pitchside barrier. The idea that us needing to build a 12-15 step terrace at the open end is unachievable or going to run to the cost of millions is just absurd. It can literally be concrete terracing with suitable crush barriers. It doesn't even need a roof to quality right now. I appreciate there are safety assessments and foundations to such things, but seriously, the existing ground was constructed for far less than a million, and a major cost has been that these are all covered stands. Building a modest, open terrace does not run to massive expense. There are plenty of football clubs with far less than us who manage it.

If you want to argue about the football league, then fine, i accept the difficulties in developing Blackwell for the Football League. It would be expensive and basically involve tearing down what we have built, and in such circumstances I could see an argument for ground sharing at the Arena - and i mean literally if we were in a position that we would not be promoted if we didn't agree to play there the following year. Not that we thought we might be.

I am baffled and honestly very frustrated that some people seem to want to behave like we're a football league club again. Dreaming above our station got us into a horrible mess before, and some people want to repeat it!? Madness.

Vodka_Vic
Posts: 1944
Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 10:27 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Interview with Johnston on Official Website

Post by Vodka_Vic » Mon Dec 30, 2019 9:35 pm

Who were you actually replying to there H1987? The last few posts have not supported the Arena.
AA and DJ have repeatedly said that the plan is eventually to get the club back into the EFL. That we have a vision is important to attracting players.
We will see the proposals soon enough and all the costings of BM v Arena v Plot of land and all the pros and cons of each and a step by step plan of how to fund each level. People will then vote on it, I'm sure.
I think enough has been implied by DJ and Craig Morley that this can be best achieved away from BM in their eyes. Quakerz (or Ghost) has summed it up perfectly when he says it's a real shitt sandwich any way you look at it. When the proposals do come out , though, they'll probably be a damn long read! And DJ has gone on record as saying that the Arena is not fit for purpose to have 2,000 people in a 25k plus bowl.

m62exile
Posts: 2178
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 2:11 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Interview with Johnston on Official Website

Post by m62exile » Mon Dec 30, 2019 9:51 pm

I’m having a hard time reading people dismissing an idea they know nothing about. It’s infantile.

Wait and see what’s proposed and then argue your point based on some analysis of what you read.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

quakersfan
Posts: 357
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2018 2:26 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Interview with Johnston on Official Website

Post by quakersfan » Mon Dec 30, 2019 10:51 pm

Let’s just wait until we get an update from DJ or DFCSG until then no one really knows what the plans are.

QUAKERMAN2
Posts: 1983
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 8:43 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Interview with Johnston on Official Website

Post by QUAKERMAN2 » Mon Dec 30, 2019 10:54 pm

m62exile wrote:I’m having a hard time reading people dismissing an idea they know nothing about. It’s infantile.

Wait and see what’s proposed and then argue your point based on some analysis of what you read.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Exactly.DJ is a shrewd business man and whatever he and the DFCSG deem to be the right option for us then that is fine by me.
He knows full well the rugby boys have got away with murder so let’s just see what transpires.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Ghost_Of_1883
Posts: 716
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2018 9:33 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Interview with Johnston on Official Website

Post by Ghost_Of_1883 » Mon Dec 30, 2019 11:12 pm

H1987 wrote:
Mon Dec 30, 2019 9:05 pm
This really isn't that difficult to grasp. Hard standing is 4 deep. If you build a 12 step terrace, that's 8 people more deep. So lets say you have an area of 400 hard standing, with the 12 step terrace it can now hold those original 400 in the front 4 rows, plus another 800 behind them who previously could not fit or be counted towards capacity. This goes directly onto the capacity the deeper you make the terrace. It's not difficult to get your head around. A 12 step terrace is not particularly large. The old tinshed was 13. Maybe you need to make it a 15 step terrace, even if you do - that is not that big a terrace. The old south stand at Feethams must've been about 25 for christs sakes.
But it's not as simple as that. So I really don't know why you are talking about "this really isn't that difficult to grasp", and "it's not difficult to get your head around" as if I'm some numpty with half of the intelligence of yourself.

When people talk about hard standing being based on 4 men deep, that's as a simple guide only. It isn't based on 4 men deep, it's based on people per metre squared x one or two other other factors to make the capacity calculation, and it's the same for terracing.

If it was as simple as that, then if the open end holds c700 at 4 men deep then the tin shed (8 steps) should hold c1400. It doesn't. It holds 1,000.

So when you are talking about a 1,000 capacity terrace in the open end (you said this not me), it is being built on roughly on 450 hard standing capacity if it occupies 2/3rd of the width behind the goal. This would only give an increase of 550 and not even get us to 4,000.

Nobody mentioned how many steps this terrace would be, not you or I - I'd guess 12 at 2/3rds width. But to get to 4,000+ we'd need a terrace which held more than 1,000.
You cannot make any rational argument that Blackwell Meadows cannot be expanded beyond 4,000.
I didn't say it couldn't be. It obviously can be (providing we don't lose the clubhouse side hard standing capacity), but what I'm saying is that it probably won't be as easy or as cheap as you expect.
As for hard standing, it can be converted simply with additional standing barriers to there is a walkway around the pitch. The idea that we'd lose half of the ground if we went up is a total nonsense statement. Just look at some of the existing clubs in the conference national. Maidenhead, Chorley, Harrogate, Dover, Sutton and a bunch of others all have these areas. I've been to Sutton, it's crapper than Blackwell.
Well I hope you're right on this one and that simply erecting another barrier will do the job regarding the hard standing.
The idea that us needing to build a 12-15 step terrace at the open end is unachievable or going to run to the cost of millions is just absurd. It can literally be concrete terracing with suitable crush barriers. It doesn't even need a roof to quality right now.
No one said it was unachievable, so who are you even arguing with? My concern was that actually a 1000 terrace wouldn't get us to 4,000 on it's own. Yes we could build a bigger one, but again my concern was about losing the hard standing capacity.
but seriously, the existing ground was constructed for far less than a million, and a major cost has been that these are all covered stands. Building a modest, open terrace does not run to massive expense. There are plenty of football clubs with far less than us who manage it.
Even Bishop's ground cost £2m. There was already the clubhouse, floodlights, pitch etc at BM before we moved in. As the stand cost in the region of 300k, and we put new interior fence all around, put new exterior fence all around, put hard standing all around, rebuilt the tinshed, installed a new pa system, lights, turnstiles etc - and then the building of the changing rooms etc (though that might have been the rugby clubs cost), and the car park ad barriers (council I think) - less than a million? I doubt it.
If you want to argue about the football league, then fine, i accept the difficulties in developing Blackwell for the Football League. It would be expensive and basically involve tearing down what we have built, and in such circumstances I could see an argument for ground sharing at the Arena - and i mean literally if we were in a position that we would not be promoted if we didn't agree to play there the following year. Not that we thought we might be.
End of the day our ambition is to return to the football league. I don't think it will happen in my life time unless we get a freak season, but that's only my opinion. However unrealistic our ambition may seem right now, it is the goal and we need to be looking at the infrastructure practicalities based on that goal - ie 5000 capacity ground with 2000 seats, no placcy pitch, better income streams from the ground etc.
I am baffled and honestly very frustrated that some people seem to want to behave like we're a football league club again. Dreaming above our station got us into a horrible mess before, and some people want to repeat it!? Madness.
It is not madness to dare to dream. No one is behaving like we're a football league club either.

Also, I note that you didn't make any comment about our security at BM. What assurances do we have that the rugby club won't tire of us and kick us out when they reach the point where we are not needed.
We are Darlo! We know our shitt! If we say it's 1-2-0-1-1-3-0-1-1 then you better believe it! La la la oo, la la la oo (clap, clap, clap, clap)

H1987
Posts: 1549
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 4:14 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Interview with Johnston on Official Website

Post by H1987 » Mon Dec 30, 2019 11:43 pm

Ghost_Of_1883 wrote:
Mon Dec 30, 2019 11:12 pm
H1987 wrote:
Mon Dec 30, 2019 9:05 pm
This really isn't that difficult to grasp. Hard standing is 4 deep. If you build a 12 step terrace, that's 8 people more deep. So lets say you have an area of 400 hard standing, with the 12 step terrace it can now hold those original 400 in the front 4 rows, plus another 800 behind them who previously could not fit or be counted towards capacity. This goes directly onto the capacity the deeper you make the terrace. It's not difficult to get your head around. A 12 step terrace is not particularly large. The old tinshed was 13. Maybe you need to make it a 15 step terrace, even if you do - that is not that big a terrace. The old south stand at Feethams must've been about 25 for christs sakes.
But it's not as simple as that. So I really don't know why you are talking about "this really isn't that difficult to grasp", and "it's not difficult to get your head around" as if I'm some numpty with half of the intelligence of yourself.

When people talk about hard standing being based on 4 men deep, that's as a simple guide only. It isn't based on 4 men deep, it's based on people per metre squared x one or two other other factors to make the capacity calculation, and it's the same for terracing.

If it was as simple as that, then if the open end holds c700 at 4 men deep then the tin shed (8 steps) should hold c1400. It doesn't. It holds 1,000.

So when you are talking about a 1,000 capacity terrace in the open end (you said this not me), it is being built on roughly on 450 hard standing capacity if it occupies 2/3rd of the width behind the goal. This would only give an increase of 550 and not even get us to 4,000.

Nobody mentioned how many steps this terrace would be, not you or I - I'd guess 12 at 2/3rds width. But to get to 4,000+ we'd need a terrace which held more than 1,000.
You cannot make any rational argument that Blackwell Meadows cannot be expanded beyond 4,000.
I didn't say it couldn't be. It obviously can be (providing we don't lose the clubhouse side hard standing capacity), but what I'm saying is that it probably won't be as easy or as cheap as you expect.
As for hard standing, it can be converted simply with additional standing barriers to there is a walkway around the pitch. The idea that we'd lose half of the ground if we went up is a total nonsense statement. Just look at some of the existing clubs in the conference national. Maidenhead, Chorley, Harrogate, Dover, Sutton and a bunch of others all have these areas. I've been to Sutton, it's crapper than Blackwell.
Well I hope you're right on this one and that simply erecting another barrier will do the job regarding the hard standing.
The idea that us needing to build a 12-15 step terrace at the open end is unachievable or going to run to the cost of millions is just absurd. It can literally be concrete terracing with suitable crush barriers. It doesn't even need a roof to quality right now.
No one said it was unachievable, so who are you even arguing with? My concern was that actually a 1000 terrace wouldn't get us to 4,000 on it's own. Yes we could build a bigger one, but again my concern was about losing the hard standing capacity.
but seriously, the existing ground was constructed for far less than a million, and a major cost has been that these are all covered stands. Building a modest, open terrace does not run to massive expense. There are plenty of football clubs with far less than us who manage it.
Even Bishop's ground cost £2m. There was already the clubhouse, floodlights, pitch etc at BM before we moved in. As the stand cost in the region of 300k, and we put new interior fence all around, put new exterior fence all around, put hard standing all around, rebuilt the tinshed, installed a new pa system, lights, turnstiles etc - and then the building of the changing rooms etc (though that might have been the rugby clubs cost), and the car park ad barriers (council I think) - less than a million? I doubt it.
If you want to argue about the football league, then fine, i accept the difficulties in developing Blackwell for the Football League. It would be expensive and basically involve tearing down what we have built, and in such circumstances I could see an argument for ground sharing at the Arena - and i mean literally if we were in a position that we would not be promoted if we didn't agree to play there the following year. Not that we thought we might be.
End of the day our ambition is to return to the football league. I don't think it will happen in my life time unless we get a freak season, but that's only my opinion. However unrealistic our ambition may seem right now, it is the goal and we need to be looking at the infrastructure practicalities based on that goal - ie 5000 capacity ground with 2000 seats, no placcy pitch, better income streams from the ground etc.
I am baffled and honestly very frustrated that some people seem to want to behave like we're a football league club again. Dreaming above our station got us into a horrible mess before, and some people want to repeat it!? Madness.
It is not madness to dare to dream. No one is behaving like we're a football league club either.

Also, I note that you didn't make any comment about our security at BM. What assurances do we have that the rugby club won't tire of us and kick us out when they reach the point where we are not needed.
Look, this is becoming wildly more obscure. I’m not sitting and doing the calculations, but it’s simple, common sense that you build a terrace an appropriate size and do those calculations before you make it. The capacity of the tinshed is 1,200 and it’s only 8 steps. Yes, we can only use 2/3 of the open end, but Christ, it’s not that much of a leap to figure out we can build a deeper stand of that size using that 2/3’s of the pitch.

Also, yes Bishop cost that money because they built it from scratch. We massively benefitted at Blackwell from existing infrastructure - the parts that are often the most expensive. We’re not talking about expensive stands here, we are talking about a simple, uncovered terrace, and crush barriers. We also know the cost of infrastructure we have built already based on what we raised, and we know fine well it isn’t millions.

Final point - we have a legally binding contract for 17 years. A contract we are going to have to pay for that duration. Beyond that, there is no guarantee, but Jesus Christ it’s 17 years away. I distinctly doubt the rugby club will turn down more money for very little effort 17 years from now, but we also don’t know who we would be negotiating with at that point. Either way, worry about that 2-3 years before the contract is up, not nearly 2 decades. It might not suit us at that point either.

Ghost_Of_1883
Posts: 716
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2018 9:33 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Interview with Johnston on Official Website

Post by Ghost_Of_1883 » Tue Dec 31, 2019 1:00 am

H1987 wrote:
Mon Dec 30, 2019 11:43 pm

Look, this is becoming wildly more obscure. I’m not sitting and doing the calculations, but it’s simple, common sense that you build a terrace an appropriate size and do those calculations before you make it. The capacity of the tinshed is 1,200 and it’s only 8 steps. Yes, we can only use 2/3 of the open end, but Christ, it’s not that much of a leap to figure out we can build a deeper stand of that size using that 2/3’s of the pitch.
Yes it is becoming more obscure but why do you keep on saying that its not much of a leap to figure out that we can build a deeper stand, as if I hadn't managed to figure that out? I never said it couldn't be done, you're arguing against points that I never made.

PS the tin shed holds 1,000.
We are Darlo! We know our shitt! If we say it's 1-2-0-1-1-3-0-1-1 then you better believe it! La la la oo, la la la oo (clap, clap, clap, clap)

H1987
Posts: 1549
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 4:14 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Interview with Johnston on Official Website

Post by H1987 » Tue Dec 31, 2019 1:46 am

You’re being deliberately pedantic and exaggerating figures to make out building a modest uncovered terrace to raise the capacity is somehow astronomically expensive, when to anyone with common sense it clearly is not.

Ghost_Of_1883
Posts: 716
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2018 9:33 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Interview with Johnston on Official Website

Post by Ghost_Of_1883 » Tue Dec 31, 2019 9:02 am

H1987 wrote:
Tue Dec 31, 2019 1:46 am
You’re being deliberately pedantic and exaggerating figures to make out building a modest uncovered terrace to raise the capacity is somehow astronomically expensive, when to anyone with common sense it clearly is not.
No, not at all.

Depending on the hard standing situation, we may need much more than a modest terrace. It could get big on us and we need to be prepared for that. And getting a ground up to Cat A is more than just getting the capacity to 4,000 regardless of that.

I could counter argue that you are deliberately burying your head in the sand when I raise the possibility of escalating costs. Wanting something to be so, ie wanting it to be a cheap easy upgrade, does not necessarily make it so.

At the end of it all, for the good of the club I hope you are right.
We are Darlo! We know our shitt! If we say it's 1-2-0-1-1-3-0-1-1 then you better believe it! La la la oo, la la la oo (clap, clap, clap, clap)

Old Git
Posts: 376
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2019 9:09 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Interview with Johnston on Official Website

Post by Old Git » Tue Dec 31, 2019 10:29 am

What about the aesthetics of developing Blackwell Meadows. It is going to be weird looking with a seated stand running half the length of one side a standing terrace covering 2/3 of one end and a clubhouse down the other side. Will never look good and future generations will think we were bonkers to spend our money on building such a strange place.
Is there some way we could relocate the pitch slightly so that we could lessen the effect of the pipeline? Maybe moving it say by 30 metres along so the pipeline is on the periphery of the pitch. May sound a little far fetched but if it could be done might be a good solution. It would also mean the clubhouse would be in the corner of the ground and may free up more land to put terracing on. The Tin Shed and seated stand are supposed to be movable so may be possible. Of course Rugby Club may not allow it but if that is the case it may tell us all we need to know about our future there.

User avatar
theoriginalfatcat
Posts: 4412
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 7:40 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Interview with Johnston on Official Website

Post by theoriginalfatcat » Tue Dec 31, 2019 10:41 am

Following on from your post O.G. it seems obvious now that the Rugby Club just see us as an irritation - when we first arrived I mistakenly thought we were getting involved in some kind of friendly joint venture, but they won't even loosen up in relation to the little things.
Mr Singh said this " I'm not expecting to get back any of the money I've already put in, I'm prepared to write it off for the future of the club. I'm not hanging in to make any kind of financial gain in the short or long term - if someone was prepared to come in and take the club off my hands, I'd be more than willing to discuss it"

Tamworth matchday programme 26 Nov 2011

lo36789
Posts: 8494
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 10:58 pm
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: Liverpool

Re: Interview with Johnston on Official Website

Post by lo36789 » Tue Dec 31, 2019 12:11 pm

Old Git wrote:
Tue Dec 31, 2019 10:29 am
What about the aesthetics of developing Blackwell Meadows. It is going to be weird looking with a seated stand running half the length of one side a standing terrace covering 2/3 of one end and a clubhouse down the other side. Will never look good and future generations will think we were bonkers to spend our money on building such a strange place.
Is there some way we could relocate the pitch slightly so that we could lessen the effect of the pipeline? Maybe moving it say by 30 metres along so the pipeline is on the periphery of the pitch. May sound a little far fetched but if it could be done might be a good solution. It would also mean the clubhouse would be in the corner of the ground and may free up more land to put terracing on. The Tin Shed and seated stand are supposed to be movable so may be possible. Of course Rugby Club may not allow it but if that is the case it may tell us all we need to know about our future there.
When you say there are moveable I think the reality is they can be relocated and it save you money on materials but ultimately the cost to put back in place will still be the same as originally incurred + you have dismantling costs to factor in. You would also need to move the boundary fence, pitch perimeter fencing, hard standing areas...not sure about the floodlights.

It won't be cheap, but in terms of options on the table then I figure it is another one to add to the mix. I think if I am not mistaken a move of this sort could effectively enable us to have 2 full width stands at either end plus a 3/4 length stand where the current seated stands are.

PierremontQuaker03
Posts: 1839
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:53 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Interview with Johnston on Official Website

Post by PierremontQuaker03 » Wed Jan 01, 2020 8:46 pm

Listening to the interview again it looks as though DJ is going to Walsall to assist him putting a plan together to justify / or how he could make a new stadium work. If some land does become available and grants are on offer and to get the additional/remaining funding, a business plan with how the repayment of a loan needs to be done.
Surely its not pie in the sky that a new stadium could be funded - if Walsall can turnover circa 7 million per annum from an old tired stadium surely a new shiny asset of a new ground we could replicate what Walsall are doing. I can understand how DJ has had his eyes opened on this as a potential opportunity to put a proposal together and while we now have a relatively low costs base (playing squad, staff etc) now is the time to do it before the playing budget starts to increase.
“If you can't hit a driver, don't.”
Greg Norman

banktopp
Posts: 688
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2013 8:59 pm
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: Hereford

Re: Interview with Johnston on Official Website

Post by banktopp » Wed Jan 01, 2020 8:57 pm

PierremontQuaker03 wrote:
Wed Jan 01, 2020 8:46 pm

Surely its not pie in the sky that a new stadium could be funded - if Walsall can turnover circa 7 million per annum from an old tired stadium
Didn't look like a old tired stadium to me 6 weeks ago when we played there. It was built in 1990.

H1987
Posts: 1549
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 4:14 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Interview with Johnston on Official Website

Post by H1987 » Wed Jan 01, 2020 10:48 pm

lo36789 wrote:
Tue Dec 31, 2019 12:11 pm
Old Git wrote:
Tue Dec 31, 2019 10:29 am
What about the aesthetics of developing Blackwell Meadows. It is going to be weird looking with a seated stand running half the length of one side a standing terrace covering 2/3 of one end and a clubhouse down the other side. Will never look good and future generations will think we were bonkers to spend our money on building such a strange place.
Is there some way we could relocate the pitch slightly so that we could lessen the effect of the pipeline? Maybe moving it say by 30 metres along so the pipeline is on the periphery of the pitch. May sound a little far fetched but if it could be done might be a good solution. It would also mean the clubhouse would be in the corner of the ground and may free up more land to put terracing on. The Tin Shed and seated stand are supposed to be movable so may be possible. Of course Rugby Club may not allow it but if that is the case it may tell us all we need to know about our future there.
When you say there are moveable I think the reality is they can be relocated and it save you money on materials but ultimately the cost to put back in place will still be the same as originally incurred + you have dismantling costs to factor in. You would also need to move the boundary fence, pitch perimeter fencing, hard standing areas...not sure about the floodlights.

It won't be cheap, but in terms of options on the table then I figure it is another one to add to the mix. I think if I am not mistaken a move of this sort could effectively enable us to have 2 full width stands at either end plus a 3/4 length stand where the current seated stands are.
Yep, and the major cost is the clubhouse - we would need our own, with all the facilities it entails - or a main stand with those features... and erect our own floodlights... which would all cost a *lot* of money. That was exactly why we moved to Blackwell. As sort of awkward as that side of the ground is, it has a lot of the basic, but expensive infrastructure that we need to host games. The cost of the other stands is small by comparison.

Whatever happens next, I think we can all agree on the need for non collapsable fences and crush barriers.

alec.g.white7
Posts: 18
Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 11:32 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Interview with Johnston on Official Website

Post by alec.g.white7 » Thu Jan 02, 2020 4:43 pm

Yes agreed we will have to await DJ’s proposal report before any concrete thoughts on how supporters will vote accordingly. However to me though if by moving back to the Arena on a permanent or temporary arrangement means that the club will be better off financially then I am all for that proposal. At the moment BM allows DFC a very limited option to make income from football hospitality and non football avenues. The Arena would allow DFC to substantially increase these areas of income.
To me BM is not a football ground and never will be and the match day experience can never ever be improved. You get wet and cant see from many parts of the ground - oh and our landlords don’t really want us there.
The Arena is not ideal but it may be our best option.

jjljks
Posts: 1814
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2015 10:25 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Interview with Johnston on Official Website

Post by jjljks » Thu Jan 02, 2020 9:11 pm

BM will never be a longterm 'home' for us & it would be cheaper to start again from ground zero. Problem is lack of a suitable site within easy reach of town centre / rail station / car parking. Eastbourne pitches not suitable for development & no news of what is being offered within the "Sporting Village". Perhaps more chance of land being rented as part of Airport redevelopment if & when Tories try to hold onto old Labour seats? HMG could send money up North rather than to the Irish or Scots!

quakersfan
Posts: 357
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2018 2:26 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Interview with Johnston on Official Website

Post by quakersfan » Fri Jan 03, 2020 7:56 am

I’m sure its been said before but for a 5000 capacity stadium with club house facilities you are looking at roughly £5m. Unfortunately With the current model just can’t see us ever raising that type of money. Moving back to the Arena it will at least give us the opportunity to benefit from larger commercial revenues which over time perhaps could be put into a new ground fund which we own.

Alfie
Posts: 284
Joined: Tue May 22, 2012 8:33 am
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: Eye, Suffolk

Re: Interview with Johnston on Official Website

Post by Alfie » Fri Jan 03, 2020 8:46 am

One of the reasons often given for (perhaps reluctantly) considering the Arena again is the increased commercial revenue it could generate. Probably me being extra thick but where is this revenue coming from. I understand that several businesses have offices etc in the place, and pay rent to the rugby club. No doubt the rugby club organise one off things and get the profits from them. I can't see what we could do that the rugby club aren't already doing, and as we would be tenants we would probably need their consent to run events which they could see as being in competition with their own activities.

Genuine question - what do people have in mind when they talk of commercial opportunities?

User avatar
divas
Posts: 13087
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 1:38 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Interview with Johnston on Official Website

Post by divas » Fri Jan 03, 2020 9:36 am

Any additional revenue would have to be generated on matchdays only which still doesn’t get us where we need to be in terms of generating non matchday revenues but could at least give an uplift on what we can generate on a matchday now

H1987
Posts: 1549
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 4:14 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Interview with Johnston on Official Website

Post by H1987 » Fri Jan 03, 2020 3:49 pm

Essentially, it comes down to being able to sell more matchday hospitality.Any other revenue that the Arena can generate wouldn't be ours anyway. We won't own it. I just can't see how it would be boosted so much that it would cover having to pay two lots of rent, and justify essentially abandoning everything we've built so far, to move to an objectively worse experience for over 90% of the matchday crowd.

I understand the need to generate income. I do. But i don't agree it should be done at the cost of ruining going to the match for 90% of supporters. I've personally no interest in hospitality. I've done it once at Blackwell just to give it a go, but most of the time, i'm happy standing. Most of our fans are this way, and I don't want to see the match experience ruined by going back to a soulless, empty bowl.

al_quaker
Posts: 5571
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 2:51 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Interview with Johnston on Official Website

Post by al_quaker » Fri Jan 03, 2020 3:54 pm

I’m not disputing the awfulness of the arena, but where is the 90% coming from?

jjljks
Posts: 1814
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2015 10:25 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Interview with Johnston on Official Website

Post by jjljks » Fri Jan 03, 2020 4:20 pm

One thing Darlo fans general lack is patience so the fact that we are 'tied' into BM for a good few years is fortunate as this time must be used to develop other options - some of which may not even be on the table now. A lot has changed in recent weeks & we need to see how the economics of Brexit, let alone the change in political make-up, affects the region. Keep the faith with DJ, AA & the club, as if we stick together & make our demands clear, then the powers that be may hear us.

Darlo_Pete
Posts: 12788
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:13 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Interview with Johnston on Official Website

Post by Darlo_Pete » Fri Jan 03, 2020 10:30 pm

H1987 wrote:
Fri Jan 03, 2020 3:49 pm
Essentially, it comes down to being able to sell more matchday hospitality.Any other revenue that the Arena can generate wouldn't be ours anyway. We won't own it. I just can't see how it would be boosted so much that it would cover having to pay two lots of rent, and justify essentially abandoning everything we've built so far, to move to an objectively worse experience for over 90% of the matchday crowd.

I understand the need to generate income. I do. But i don't agree it should be done at the cost of ruining going to the match for 90% of supporters. I've personally no interest in hospitality. I've done it once at Blackwell just to give it a go, but most of the time, i'm happy standing. Most of our fans are this way, and I don't want to see the match experience ruined by going back to a soulless, empty bowl.
I know a good few fans that would be happy to return to the Arena, rather than play at soulless BM. That's just typical to suggest 90% don't want to go back to Arena. I must have been one of the few Darlo fans not to be asked whether I want to return to the Arena. :roll:

biccynana
Posts: 737
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 11:38 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Interview with Johnston on Official Website

Post by biccynana » Fri Jan 03, 2020 10:53 pm

Darlo_Pete wrote:
Fri Jan 03, 2020 10:30 pm
H1987 wrote:
Fri Jan 03, 2020 3:49 pm
Essentially, it comes down to being able to sell more matchday hospitality.Any other revenue that the Arena can generate wouldn't be ours anyway. We won't own it. I just can't see how it would be boosted so much that it would cover having to pay two lots of rent, and justify essentially abandoning everything we've built so far, to move to an objectively worse experience for over 90% of the matchday crowd.

I understand the need to generate income. I do. But i don't agree it should be done at the cost of ruining going to the match for 90% of supporters. I've personally no interest in hospitality. I've done it once at Blackwell just to give it a go, but most of the time, i'm happy standing. Most of our fans are this way, and I don't want to see the match experience ruined by going back to a soulless, empty bowl.
I know a good few fans that would be happy to return to the Arena, rather than play at soulless BM.
As opposed to the Arena, just bursting with charm and character.

Post Reply