New Stadium Costs

[Morecambe Player]

In 2010, Morecambe move into the Globe Arena, capacity just over 6,000, cost, just over £12m.

In 1997, Stoke City moved into the Britannia Stadium, capacity 27,500, cost, £14.7m

Amazing what around £14 million bought you 13 years ago, and what it buys you now...

[Christies Child]

What is the cost of the Arena WITHOUT the additional sports pitches and training areas?

Remove those and the cost of relocating Westgate Wanderers and we might be able to get a truer comparison.

[George Dawes]

it's not what your buying its what your paying builder's & materials and dont belive the wages for tradesmen and material's back then have changed all that much significantly now



i still think there something wrong somewhere why we cant have a roof on the north stand especially when the builders are sponsoring the new ground



they could just build it and then we pay them back at the end of the sponsorship or give them a extra year of the sponsorship deal from 4yrs to 5yrs or installments, it's just commen sense to get it built while the manpower & machinery is there now

[Christies Child]

it's not what your buying its what your paying builder's & materials and dont belive the wages for tradesmen and material's back then have changed all that much significantly now



i still think there something wrong somewhere why we cant have a roof on the north stand especially when the builders are sponsoring the new ground



they could just build it and then we pay them back at the end of the sponsorship or give them a extra year of the sponsorship deal from 4yrs to 5yrs or installments, it's just commen sense to get it built while the manpower & machinery is there now

Could it be that grants will be available to do a proper job sooner rather than later?

AND whilst wages have increased in-line with inflation, raw material costs have gone through the roof.

However if grants are not available, I still can't understand why we couldn't have made use of some of the North Stand terracing.

[George Dawes]

AND whilst wages have increased in-line with inflation

certainly not in the building trade if anything the rate of pay is going down for tradesmen because employer's are exploiting the situation knowing people are desperate for work and will under cut the next man due to the current economic downturn


and ive noticed this over the past 18months or so, as i always keep a look out in the local papers to see what the going rate of pay is


plus i worked down London 10yrs ago and the rate there then was better than it is now maybe due to a large influx of cheap EU workers undercutting British workers

[mrpotatohead]

Like builders did nt hike their prices when things were booming, if a roof was put on the north terrace dads with a junior could watch from the halfway line without getting wet, making the elitist stand emptier as i have said earlier.

[Heysham_Shrimp]

Its an uncharacteristic short sighted decision by the board IMHO.

If we go up via the play-offs and teams like Leeds , Southampton , Sheffield Wednesday and Carlisle are in that league then we will not be able to accommodate all the away fans that come. The new North side if bigger and covered could be used as an overflow for away fans when the East stand is full.

[mrpotatohead]

AS opposed to having lads n dads (or mums) and paddock fans, halfwayliners who want to keep dry coming every week and paying for area c, build nothing and turn the north terrace over for one or two games a year, sitting in area c is a 30% rise minimum for my son and I.

[shrimper]

Its an uncharacteristic short sighted decision by the board IMHO.

If we go up via the play-offs and teams like Leeds , Southampton , Sheffield Wednesday and Carlisle are in that league then we will not be able to accommodate all the away fans that come. The new North side if bigger and covered could be used as an overflow for away fans when the East stand is full.

I've said this before but it seems it's worth repeating.

The whole point of this move is to get a stadium and other facilities that can bring the club revenue 364 days a year. Without that, on the gates we get, we would be forever in the situation of relying on generous directors to keep us afloat, never mind in the Football League.

When people are going on about roofs on that side they should keep that in mind.

There were grants available a couple of years ago that, because of various spending cuts, are no longer available. There was also a realistic anticipation of a lot of money from the interest on the sale of Christie Park - interest rates plummeted and so did that cash.

IF things had been the same now as they were a few years ago then a lot of the facilities originally planned would have come to fruition and that would have included things like a roof on the north terrace - it was in the original plan.

But cutbacks had to be made (and can we not trust this particular board, for all they've done for this club, to make sensible decisions?).

They have concentrated on those parts of the ground that are going to offer our club an immediate income, rather than spending on parts of the ground that will have relatively limited use, only on match days. Yes we 'may' have to accommodate Leeds or Southampton in future - but do we spend money now on that off-chance or, say, on the function room that we know will bring us an income?

All those features people mention - roofs, enclosed corners etc - are still in the longer term 'ideas' and the ground plan has merely had them removed for now.

We're all regulars and can have our say - but really this town doesn't support the club well enough to expect what we're getting with this new stadium, never mind analysing its 'faults'.

We're blessed with a great board who are giving us something we should be thankful for. They DO care about what the fans think but sometimes there are tough decisions to make and I think they are making them sensibly. I also think that, if and when things improve a bit, they WILL try to meet all our reasonable expectations. But we may have to be patient and trust them for now.

[mrpotatohead]

totally agree with all glens points.

But from past experience, well meaning well off people do not understand the meaning of skint.

the home and away ends will be what they are now.

the new carwash terace will be the same and probably used for extra away support.

The centrepiece of our new arena will be at best , half full for all major games, which is total madness.

[shrimper]

totally agree with all glens points.

But from past experience, well meaning well off people do not understand the meaning of skint.

the home and away ends will be what they are now.

the new carwash terace will be the same and probably used for extra away support.

The centrepiece of our new arena will be at best , half full for all major games, which is total madness.

I think you may be surprised, Lee. I shall probably be migrating over there to make use of the facilities, with my family in tow. I think others might go there as well - for me the season ticket offer in the main stand is a great one. It equates to less than I'm paying game by game (don't have a season ticket this season) in the North Stand now.

You may find more and more people moving into the main stand and the home end being for the singers and chanters, by and large. If I'm right, that's great for the income to the main stand and also for the atmosphere in the home end which, judging by the 'feel of it' when I stood on it the other week, should create a fantastic noise.

I'd add that if anyone has issues with the structure of the season ticketing arrangements, talk to the club - see if something can be sorted out, they do have a pretty good record on that you know.

[heysham_mfc]

just out of interest how many away fans can we take?

[Christies Child]

I could be wrong in this ( ) but has anybody else noticed the lack of work on the North Side recently

Could it be that the club are waiting to see if we gain entry to League 1 and if so may have to provide additional capacity in this area

Probably not but 2 months of intensive work in that area may be on the cards.

Ok stupid thought!

[shrimper]

just out of interest how many away fans can we take?

http://www.morecambestadium.co.uk/more_info.asp?current_id=57

Plus there's a section of the seating allocated to away fans.

[heysham_mfc]

just out of interest how many away fans can we take?

http://www.morecambestadium.co.uk/more_info.asp?current_id=57

Plus there's a section of the seating allocated to away fans.

thanks was not sure if that infomation was still correct

[Heysham_Shrimp]

Its an uncharacteristic short sighted decision by the board IMHO.

If we go up via the play-offs and teams like Leeds , Southampton , Sheffield Wednesday and Carlisle are in that league then we will not be able to accommodate all the away fans that come. The new North side if bigger and covered could be used as an overflow for away fans when the East stand is full.

I've said this before but it seems it's worth repeating.

The whole point of this move is to get a stadium and other facilities that can bring the club revenue 364 days a year. Without that, on the gates we get, we would be forever in the situation of relying on generous directors to keep us afloat, never mind in the Football League.

When people are going on about roofs on that side they should keep that in mind.

There were grants available a couple of years ago that, because of various spending cuts, are no longer available. There was also a realistic anticipation of a lot of money from the interest on the sale of Christie Park - interest rates plummeted and so did that cash.

IF things had been the same now as they were a few years ago then a lot of the facilities originally planned would have come to fruition and that would have included things like a roof on the north terrace - it was in the original plan.

But cutbacks had to be made (and can we not trust this particular board, for all they've done for this club, to make sensible decisions?).

They have concentrated on those parts of the ground that are going to offer our club an immediate income, rather than spending on parts of the ground that will have relatively limited use, only on match days. Yes we 'may' have to accommodate Leeds or Southampton in future - but do we spend money now on that off-chance or, say, on the function room that we know will bring us an income?

All those features people mention - roofs, enclosed corners etc - are still in the longer term 'ideas' and the ground plan has merely had them removed for now.

We're all regulars and can have our say - but really this town doesn't support the club well enough to expect what we're getting with this new stadium, never mind analysing its 'faults'.

We're blessed with a great board who are giving us something we should be thankful for. They DO care about what the fans think but sometimes there are tough decisions to make and I think they are making them sensibly. I also think that, if and when things improve a bit, they WILL try to meet all our reasonable expectations. But we may have to be patient and trust them for now.

I understand the argument for putting the lion's share of the capital costs into building the main stand as that is something that can not be altered in future years.
I am talking as a former amateur striker and accountant so it is the accountancy aspect I am interested in! What is the cost of the rather spartan North Stand? I would imagine it is quite a considerable amount. Then you would have to know the cost of a covered terrace rather like at Burton Albion. A minus B would give you an idea of how much would be needed to do the covered terrace. If the difference was for arguments sake £300,000 I am sure a good business plan and cashflow forecast could be put to the lending institutions. Borrowed over 10 years thats £30k per year + interest. You would only need about 4 "big" matches per season where the away fans overflow into the north side to make the repayments. I agree that unless we go into league 1 we have to keep it as it is though.

[Keith]

If the difference was for arguments sake £300,000 I am sure a good business plan and cashflow forecast could be put to the lending institutions. Borrowed over 10 years thats £30k per year + interest. You would only need about 4 "big" matches per season where the away fans overflow into the north side to make the repayments. I agree that unless we go into league 1 we have to keep it as it is though.

...or we could miss out on promotion, end up relegated next season and have a £300,000 debt to repay from a three-quarter empty stadium?

I'm not suggesting we will get relegated back to the Blue Square, but your 'big game theory' involves us not just getting promoted to League 1 but remaining there for a decade. It is not beyond the realms of probability that even if we go up soon, we would be favourite to come straight back down, so most of that ten year plan may need to be repaid on League 2 attendances. I'd rather trust the board's decision, not through blind faith or sycophancy but simply because they have proved they can make the right decisions previously.

[RedRedWine1]

I think you've got to question the spend on the project and where the money has gone. Yes we are getting more than just a stadium, but it's still a bit of a head scratcher when you try and cost out where all the money has gone. Obviously I'm basing this on what other clubs have paid, Burton Albion for example paid £7 million for there new stadium which isn't too much different to our own. They don't have the community facilities, but I can't equate those to a further £5 million plus the cost of a decent sized terrace with a roof along the north side of the ground. Does the £12 million figure include the loans that have been repaid to directors?

[Heysham_Shrimp]

If the difference was for arguments sake £300,000 I am sure a good business plan and cashflow forecast could be put to the lending institutions. Borrowed over 10 years thats £30k per year + interest. You would only need about 4 "big" matches per season where the away fans overflow into the north side to make the repayments. I agree that unless we go into league 1 we have to keep it as it is though.

...or we could miss out on promotion, end up relegated next season and have a £300,000 debt to repay from a three-quarter empty stadium?

I'm not suggesting we will get relegated back to the Blue Square, but your 'big game theory' involves us not just getting promoted to League 1 but remaining there for a decade. It is not beyond the realms of probability that even if we go up soon, we would be favourite to come straight back down, so most of that ten year plan may need to be repaid on League 2 attendances. I'd rather trust the board's decision, not through blind faith or sycophancy but simply because they have proved they can make the right decisions previously.

Well you might be right and you might be wrong.

The club borrowed £200,000 (admittedly interest free) from Lancaster City Council towards the cost of the North Stand and that was with only the prospects of Conference gates at that time. The loan was repaid ahead of schedule I believe so I dont go with this "little" Morecambe FC thing.

[RedRedWine1]

But didn't the club build the North stand so that the ground was brought up to Football League criteria, with the long-term aim of gaining football league status? I don't think you can compare the different projects, built for two differnt reasons.

[shrimper]

I think you've got to question the spend on the project and where the money has gone. Yes we are getting more than just a stadium, but it's still a bit of a head scratcher when you try and cost out where all the money has gone. Obviously I'm basing this on what other clubs have paid, Burton Albion for example paid £7 million for there new stadium which isn't too much different to our own. They don't have the community facilities, but I can't equate those to a further £5 million plus the cost of a decent sized terrace with a roof along the north side of the ground. Does the £12 million figure include the loans that have been repaid to directors?

I'm usually 'with' you on most things but (and I know it was only a form of words, but..) I actually think we 'don't' have to question the spend.
I think we as supporters (and I really mean the town of Morecambe not us regulars) would have a bit of a cheek questioning the spend, to be honest.
This board, whatever our individual preferences for certain bits of the new stadium, is quite capable of assessing things and doing what's right (generally speaking - we're all human and maybe one or two things over the years could be slightly amended in hindsight). We can have our debate and input but really should just be grateful and let them get on with it. They have a track record which deserves our trust and, more than that, they are overseeing a development that we really have no right to even dream about, given the poor support the club gets.

If you look at Shrewsbury and Burton (which I think are two of the stadiums they've looked closely at), neither has the community facilities (therefore none of the income-generators) and neither has a main stand and function facilities quite as good as ours will be.

Shrewsbury's is a bigger, grander-looking stadium but a lot of money has been spent on all-seater stands where you could argue they don't need them (and which can only ever bring in money on match days) and, as I say, it lacks the five-a-side pitches, other sports courts and community building.

If some of the Sainsbury's money has been used to clear personal debts to individuals, I think that's good. As a club it makes no sense (as we've seen many, many times very recently) to owe money to anyone if you can avoid it.

[Christies Child]

When asked the question at the AGM of Shareholders it was confirmed that all outstanding monies owed to Directors had been settled.

As far as I'm concerned it's not for us to quibble about the cost. That's the Boards responsibilty and as long as we have the present people on the Board I trust their judgement in this matter.

It would be nice to have that additional roof but at the moment our gates don't warrant diverting money from other areas. Maybe in 12 months it will be necessary!

I'm confident that they have a Business Plan that covers all eventualities. Let them get on with it and just be grateful that we are looking to be self financing, something that few clubs can aspire to.

[RedRedWine1]

Yes, sorry a really poor choice of words by me. I'm not having a go, and agree with you about repayment of director loans (if there are any). It's just a lot of money to spend and not have a ground that isn't completed. The new project has had to have cut backs (changed the north and west sides of the ground, no hotel or outlets) yet we've still managed to spend £12 million. What has caused these cutbacks? Are there aspects of the build that has costed more than initially planned (and we didn't have contingencies for), or were we originally planning to spend more than £12 million?

Burton has got top notch conferencing facilities; I've been there during previous employment. They don't have the community facilities, though that is a touchy subject with the local council as I believe such facilities were in the original plan along with a hotel (like ours). Even so a couple of football pitches, tennis courts, and a building on the corner of the new ground (that looks like it would obscure the view of the pitch for any further development on that side) doesn't seem to equate to £5 million pounds plus a stand with a roof (the difference between the cost of the Brewers ground and our own). Admittedly I know nothing about building projects and there costs, but it seems like a big difference to me. There must be reasons for this?

Funnily enough Rod said something on the radio last night about not having any grants available to them due to the composition of the ground that they had gone with. Perhaps this is a reason why the cost seems so great; we've had to pay for everything when previously newer grounds had received funding?

[thegentlegiant]

When asked the question at the AGM of Shareholders it was confirmed that all outstanding monies owed to Directors had been settled.

As far as I'm concerned it's not for us to quibble about the cost. That's the Boards responsibilty and as long as we have the present people on the Board I trust their judgement in this matter.

It would be nice to have that additional roof but at the moment our gates don't warrant diverting money from other areas. Maybe in 12 months it will be necessary!

I'm confident that they have a Business Plan that covers all eventualities. Let them get on with it and just be grateful that we are looking to be self financing, something that few clubs can aspire to.

Exactly they will have a business plan we all know they have other plans to regenerate other parts of the land at a later date it's all being done in thases, we do have to trust in the board and I am sure that they will be looking at grants and other means to bring funds into the club to regenerate other parts of the stadium!

We could do it all at once but leave our self short on funds, and then who can Sammy bring in, sign on a permanent contract, the club know exactly what they are doing. In the board we must trust!! Halleluiah

[Christies Child]

Don't forget that we had to re-house Westage Wanderers with a new homw AND purchase the land on which to build the Arena. Also that land has a history of poor drainage and all these cost money.

As for the Hotel and other Outlets, it was never intended that the club would fund these. Only make the land available at a rent (another revenue stream) and leave the costs of build to the companies concerned.

As for the Burton costs. Are we totally sure that the figures quoted are correct? If they came from their forum rather than via their Shareholders AGM then I'd really question the costs posted on their forum.

Remember there have been numerous figures quoted for the Sale of CP. Our AGM told it as it is!

Interestingly the Burton council seem non too pleased with what has been built. I doubt that our council will have cause to say the same about the additional facilities on offer at The Globe Arena.