Re: Cladding : Mon Jun 11, 2012 8:18 am  

D.D. wrote:

Usual pacifists. McClennan would have a poop haircut for the rest of his days to save the trouble of telling his hairdresser he wanted to change it 15 years ago.

The questions are thus:-

1) If you were to receive a new ground in 2012 would you expect it to be fully protected from the elements in both your seats and on the concourse? If not, why not?

2) If your chairman said that you would be getting said cladding six weeks after fans expressed reservations then would you expect it a) to happen or b) when it doesn't happen, get an explanation why/ If not, why not?

There are too many of our supporters who are too happy to settle for second best. They think that being runners-up is acceptable and they think that accepting a ground that has been shockingly designed is acceptable on the basis that is better than Mount Pleasant. Well it isn't. The designers have ballsed up and that is a cast iron fact. If you want to settle for a shoddily designed affair without question after all these years then that says everything about your weak personalities.

Why don't you just come out and say what you mean DD?

Re: Cladding : Mon Jun 11, 2012 12:32 pm  

Cladding money on Willie Manu me thinks

Re: Cladding : Mon Jun 11, 2012 1:21 pm  

steve wrote:

NO - That is a cast iron OPINION.

Anyone would think you actually contributed to paying for the building of the stadium and therefore your OPINION has some weight. And before you do, PLEASE don't spout that you've bought a 5 year season ticket. That does nothing but give you admission to games, nothing more noithing less and at a price lower than it would be if you bought either matches one by one or seasons.

Everyone who has bought tickets has contributed to the stadium, without them there would be no club and no stadium.

I like the stadium, but I do agree with a lot of what DD says. The design would be fantastic for a stadium in a hot sunny country, but alas, England is not one of them. We don't have enough games in a hot sunny climate to justify not having cladding round the back of the stands to protect those inside from the elements that are prevalent, such as rain. The fact that it rains in on those at the ends and backs of the stands is a basic design error.

Re: Cladding : Mon Jun 11, 2012 1:31 pm  

Billinge_Lump wrote:

Everyone who has bought tickets has contributed to the stadium, without them there would be no club and no stadium.

I like the stadium, but I do agree with a lot of what DD says. The design would be fantastic for a stadium in a hot sunny country, but alas, England is not one of them. We don't have enough games in a hot sunny climate to justify not having cladding round the back of the stands to protect those inside from the elements that are prevalent, such as rain. The fact that it rains in on those at the ends and backs of the stands is a basic design error.

No they haven't - the monies from season ticket sales would not be diverted into capital expenditure. It would be used as part of their ongoing cash flow. Capital projects are funded totally differently.

Re: Cladding : Mon Jun 11, 2012 1:38 pm  

steve wrote:

No they haven't - the monies from season ticket sales would not be diverted into capital expenditure. It would be used as part of their ongoing cash flow. Capital projects are funded totally differently.

Who will have put up capital funding with no money coming into the club, with the money coming into the club being almost solely due to fans?

Re: Cladding : Mon Jun 11, 2012 1:50 pm  

Billinge_Lump wrote:

Who will have put up capital funding with no money coming into the club, with the money coming into the club being almost solely due to fans?

The sky monies, sponsorship, corporate revenue, shareholders funds. Investors may also provide funding on the basis of future returns. The value of income from season ticket sales although significantly higher than previous years would do nothing to fund a £30m investment. It may pay some debt repayments but Mr McManus has already stated we are debt free!

Re: Cladding : Mon Jun 11, 2012 1:53 pm  

steve wrote:

NO - That is a cast iron OPINION.

Anyone would think you actually contributed to paying for the building of the stadium and therefore your OPINION has some weight. And before you do, PLEASE don't spout that you've bought a 5 year season ticket. That does nothing but give you admission to games, nothing more noithing less and at a price lower than it would be if you bought either matches one by one or seasons.

Don't suppose you fancy answering the questions that I asked do you?

Re: Cladding : Mon Jun 11, 2012 1:56 pm  

steve wrote:

The sky monies, sponsorship, corporate revenue, shareholders funds. Investors may also provide funding on the basis of future returns. The value of income from season ticket sales although significantly higher than previous years would do nothing to fund a £30m investment. It may pay some debt repayments but Mr McManus has already stated we are debt free!

Sky monies only come in because fans watch it on tv. Sponsors only buy advertising because fans see that advertising. Investors invest either for profit, or because they are fans.

Without fans, professional sport is nothing.

Which, in all honesty, is nothing to do with design flaws in the stadium.

Re: Cladding : Mon Jun 11, 2012 2:10 pm  

Billinge_Lump wrote:

Sky monies only come in because fans watch it on tv. Sponsors only buy advertising because fans see that advertising. Investors invest either for profit, or because they are fans.

Without fans, professional sport is nothing.

Which, in all honesty, is nothing to do with design flaws in the stadium.

Agreed - all I am arguing is that we as supporters have not actually paid anything towards the building of the stadium and whilst it may not be to yours or DD or some of the others on here liking you actually havent actually put any of the money up so have little recouse if it doesnt fit your utopian dream. And from where I sit its a damn site better than we have ever had and I am yet to get wet (I sit in the North Stand Block C).

Re: Cladding : Mon Jun 11, 2012 2:41 pm  

steve wrote:

Agreed - all I am arguing is that we as supporters have not actually paid anything towards the building of the stadium and whilst it may not be to yours or DD or some of the others on here liking you actually havent actually put any of the money up so have little recouse if it doesnt fit your utopian dream. And from where I sit its a damn site better than we have ever had and I am yet to get wet (I sit in the North Stand Block C).

So do I and I've also yet to get wet, however I know people in the West Stand who have got wet (and I'm not talking about people sat/stood at the front where you'd expect to get wet depending on the direction of wind). Where they are stood, it isn't a damn sight better than KR, they didn't get wet at KR when stood under the roof.

However, people are paying customers and are then entitled to make comment, and I wouldn't call it a utopian dream to have a ground where you didn't get wet.