New Stand: Ongoing work (updated)

[mitch41]

2 hours ago, Hectormasson said:

Aye it looks good from the wheatfield ,compared to the old stand ,but it lacks atmosphere,as does tyney recently ,,,hope that is going to improve...

The great atmosphere at Tynecastle comes via the team’s performances when they fight for every ball and 

get tore into the opposition whoever we’re playing. Beating Celtic 4-0 was the highlight for me as even my fellow oldies were going mental.

[been here before]

8 minutes ago, fabienleclerq said:

 

I don't work in construction but there's been things not right with the new stand that are quite obvious.

 

My seats fine BTW and the seating area and the outside look great imo. There aren't many if any better looking stands in Scotland from the outside. 

 

The roof has leaked, we decided against boxes which imo was silly, the directors entrance has been changed as it was poorly designed. The toilets were a farce to start with and were changed, the TV studio has again changed, the press box is in a poor position considering our weather etc. There isn't a separate entrance for hospitality etc, the stairway on the way out has big pillers in the middle which leads to a bizarre one big/one little stairway. We didn't appear aware how much space we would have available and the changing room has again been redesigned. The walkway was meant to go right around the ground. 

 

Now I'm no expert but the architect has not exactly played a blinder. 

 

I'll reiterate before I'm rounded on the outside areas look great but the interior hasn't been designed well hence why we have altered so much already. 

 

 

 

Nah Im afraid thats not a valid point of view as you're not an "expert in the construction industry, with detailed knowledge of the quantities of materials used in the construction and the costs of those materials, as well as the staff costs, plant hire costs, etc".

 

Until you are any of the above your opinions, observations or suggestions count for fxxk all.

[FarmerTweedy]

36 minutes ago, fabienleclerq said:

 

I don't work in construction but there's been things not right with the new stand that are quite obvious.

 

My seats fine BTW and the seating area and the outside look great imo. There aren't many if any better looking stands in Scotland from the outside. 

 

The roof has leaked, we decided against boxes which imo was silly, the directors entrance has been changed as it was poorly designed. The toilets were a farce to start with and were changed, the TV studio has again changed, the press box is in a poor position considering our weather etc. There isn't a separate entrance for hospitality etc, the stairway on the way out has big pillers in the middle which leads to a bizarre one big/one little stairway. We didn't appear aware how much space we would have available and the changing room has again been redesigned. The walkway was meant to go right around the ground. 

 

Now I'm no expert but the architect has not exactly played a blinder. 

 

I'll reiterate before I'm rounded on the outside areas look great but the interior hasn't been designed well hence why we have altered so much already. 

 

 

I actually agree that the inside hasn't been designed well, or at least not as well as would have been ideal, but that doesn't really bear much relation to the whole question of whether we should have got more, or better, for the money spent. In fact, most of the issues with the new stand could easily be put down to not spending enough, and being the result of trying to do things too cheaply.

 

For instance, dedicated entrances for directors, etc, might have cost more money and been omitted as a cost saving measure (or, it may turn out next season, implementation may have been delayed due to prioritisation of spending).

 

The question of whether the stand should have included boxes isn't entirely straightforward. Again, there would have been a cost to include them. How much that cost would be, I don't know. I also don't know how much demand there would be for such boxes at Tynecastle. I'd like to think the club did at least some basic research into that by talking to some regular hospitality customers, but have no idea if they actually did.

 

The point I'm making is not that everything's perfect with the new stand, it clearly isn't. I'm just questioning how some people can state with apparent certainty that we should have got a lot better for the money spent. 

 

It's well known that the council's plans for the nursery pretty much forced the club into acting far more quickly than they'd have liked to, in order to get any sort of new main stand built at all. It's well known that the club had very limited funds to spend, and very limited time to come up with plans. Working with very tight timescales and very limited budgets is well known to increase the likelihood of compromises having to be made and mistakes being made. It would be very easy for me to claim that if we'd only been able to spend another few million on the stand, everything that is, or has been, wrong or imperfect, could have been absolutely spot on from the outset, but that would be pure speculation on my part. I'm just asking how some people can state with certainty that we should have got more, or better, from the money we actually have spent. I strongly suspect that the answer is that these people don't actually have any rational, or informed, basis for their claims at all.

 

 

[Governor Tarkin]

We need more new stands imo.

[FarmerTweedy]

1 hour ago, been here before said:

 

Nah Im afraid thats not a valid point of view as you're not an "expert in the construction industry, with detailed knowledge of the quantities of materials used in the construction and the costs of those materials, as well as the staff costs, plant hire costs, etc".

 

Until you are any of the above your opinions, observations or suggestions count for fxxk all.

You obviously have a serious problem comprehending the English language. 

[FarmerTweedy]

Just now, Governor Tarkin said:

We need more new stands imo.

Where would we put them? The corners, maybe?

[been here before]

5 minutes ago, FarmerTweedy said:

You obviously have a serious problem comprehending the English language. 

 

Obviously, aye.

 

Especially when using your words.

[Jambo-Fox]

What about the escalators ............... going up ............. going down ....??

Edited June 12, 2019 by Jambo-Fox

[kimosavi]

7 hours ago, Governor Tarkin said:

We need more new stands imo.

We need to fill in the corners first 

[fabienleclerq]

7 hours ago, FarmerTweedy said:

I actually agree that the inside hasn't been designed well, or at least not as well as would have been ideal, but that doesn't really bear much relation to the whole question of whether we should have got more, or better, for the money spent. In fact, most of the issues with the new stand could easily be put down to not spending enough, and being the result of trying to do things too cheaply.

 

For instance, dedicated entrances for directors, etc, might have cost more money and been omitted as a cost saving measure (or, it may turn out next season, implementation may have been delayed due to prioritisation of spending).

 

The question of whether the stand should have included boxes isn't entirely straightforward. Again, there would have been a cost to include them. How much that cost would be, I don't know. I also don't know how much demand there would be for such boxes at Tynecastle. I'd like to think the club did at least some basic research into that by talking to some regular hospitality customers, but have no idea if they actually did.

 

The point I'm making is not that everything's perfect with the new stand, it clearly isn't. I'm just questioning how some people can state with apparent certainty that we should have got a lot better for the money spent. 

 

It's well known that the council's plans for the nursery pretty much forced the club into acting far more quickly than they'd have liked to, in order to get any sort of new main stand built at all. It's well known that the club had very limited funds to spend, and very limited time to come up with plans. Working with very tight timescales and very limited budgets is well known to increase the likelihood of compromises having to be made and mistakes being made. It would be very easy for me to claim that if we'd only been able to spend another few million on the stand, everything that is, or has been, wrong or imperfect, could have been absolutely spot on from the outset, but that would be pure speculation on my part. I'm just asking how some people can state with certainty that we should have got more, or better, from the money we actually have spent. I strongly suspect that the answer is that these people don't actually have any rational, or informed, basis for their claims at all.

 

 

 

I suppose the fact that we have built parts then moved or rebuilt them would suggest we have wasted a certain amount of money. I think we've spent twice in some regards. 

 

Boxes etc at the top of the stand would've been a hit imo. Even just holding ten folk you would've got people booking them for days out/birthdays etc. 

 

I'm of the opinion that we could've got the design better, I know we had to rush etc but if money was an issue we could've built the stand and kitted it out over a longer time. 

 

Hindsight of course is a wonderful thing! 

[davemclaren]

25 minutes ago, fabienleclerq said:

 

I suppose the fact that we have built parts then moved or rebuilt them would suggest we have wasted a certain amount of money. I think we've spent twice in some regards. 

 

Boxes etc at the top of the stand would've been a hit imo. Even just holding ten folk you would've got people booking them for days out/birthdays etc. 

 

I'm of the opinion that we could've got the design better, I know we had to rush etc but if money was an issue we could've built the stand and kitted it out over a longer time. 

 

Hindsight of course is a wonderful thing! 

To not build boxes was an early deliberate decision. As there was a height limit boxes would have reduced overall capacity. We’ll never know if that was the correct decision though when I was in a box at Murrayfield the seats were actually outside. ??‍♂️

[Yoda]

14 hours ago, farin said:

Some advertisement outside the shop. 

 

 

 

 

 

Souttar and Clare laughing at the size of Berra's knob.

[Thomaso]

15 hours ago, Cade said:

Spent money to get the stand open for matches as soon as possible.

Have then slowly completing it (and adding to original plans) as time and money have allowed.

Hearts have 100% done this the right way to avoid either playing a full season with three stands or spending untold thousands renting Murrayfield.

 

But....but.....what about the “Wow” factor! ?

[Thomaso]

8 hours ago, FarmerTweedy said:

I actually agree that the inside hasn't been designed well, or at least not as well as would have been ideal, but that doesn't really bear much relation to the whole question of whether we should have got more, or better, for the money spent. In fact, most of the issues with the new stand could easily be put down to not spending enough, and being the result of trying to do things too cheaply.

 

For instance, dedicated entrances for directors, etc, might have cost more money and been omitted as a cost saving measure (or, it may turn out next season, implementation may have been delayed due to prioritisation of spending).

 

The question of whether the stand should have included boxes isn't entirely straightforward. Again, there would have been a cost to include them. How much that cost would be, I don't know. I also don't know how much demand there would be for such boxes at Tynecastle. I'd like to think the club did at least some basic research into that by talking to some regular hospitality customers, but have no idea if they actually did.

 

The point I'm making is not that everything's perfect with the new stand, it clearly isn't. I'm just questioning how some people can state with apparent certainty that we should have got a lot better for the money spent. 

 

It's well known that the council's plans for the nursery pretty much forced the club into acting far more quickly than they'd have liked to, in order to get any sort of new main stand built at all. It's well known that the club had very limited funds to spend, and very limited time to come up with plans. Working with very tight timescales and very limited budgets is well known to increase the likelihood of compromises having to be made and mistakes being made. It would be very easy for me to claim that if we'd only been able to spend another few million on the stand, everything that is, or has been, wrong or imperfect, could have been absolutely spot on from the outset, but that would be pure speculation on my part. I'm just asking how some people can state with certainty that we should have got more, or better, from the money we actually have spent. I strongly suspect that the answer is that these people don't actually have any rational, or informed, basis for their claims at all.

 

 

 

Your last comment nails it FT! ?

[fabienleclerq]

1 hour ago, davemclaren said:

To not build boxes was an early deliberate decision. As there was a height limit boxes would have reduced overall capacity. We’ll never know if that was the correct decision though when I was in a box at Murrayfield the seats were actually outside. ??‍♂️

I think we could've built the facilities inside and you just take a seat at the top of the stand for the actual game. I don't mean boxes in the ground as such, kind of like the hydro ones with your own bar/barman etc and then just have the seating in the stand using top exits. 

[davemclaren]

32 minutes ago, fabienleclerq said:

I think we could've built the facilities inside and you just take a seat at the top of the stand for the actual game. I don't mean boxes in the ground as such, kind of like the hydro ones with your own bar/barman etc and then just have the seating in the stand using top exits. 

Is that not what is effectively planned for the currently unfinished level 2 - flexible rooms or something similar. 

[JohnB]

1 hour ago, Yoda said:

Souttar and Clare laughing at the size of Berra's knob.

They've obviously been at the impotence clinic - you can see the sign behind them.

[SUTOL]

3 hours ago, fabienleclerq said:

I think we could've built the facilities inside and you just take a seat at the top of the stand for the actual game. I don't mean boxes in the ground as such, kind of like the hydro ones with your own bar/barman etc and then just have the seating in the stand using top exits. 

 

That was planned at one stage. The boxes would be at the front overlooking the plaza. 

Probably put on the back burner due to lack of demand, or other priorities. 

[fabienleclerq]

5 hours ago, davemclaren said:

Is that not what is effectively planned for the currently unfinished level 2 - flexible rooms or something similar. 

Fair enough if it was, happy to be corrected. 

[Shanks said no]

7 hours ago, Yoda said:

Souttar and Clare laughing at the size of Berra's knob.

 

7 hours ago, Cruickshank for Scotland said:

 

But....but.....what about the “Wow” factor! ?

 

[been here before]

5 hours ago, JohnB said:

They've obviously been at the impotence clinic - you can see the sign behind them.

 

To be honest it looks like one of those AIDS information posters you got back in the mid 80s...

 

'Chris and Shaun are gay and so is their friend John...'.

[mitch41]

You should know that when a planned drawing is made and submitted it is costed and agreed with the customer.

Now if the build starts and the customer starts to want changes made costs can be very expensive because their 

are the fees for the architect and extra work for the trades never mind the time to consult with planning ect.

Now the cost originally was £11million with a contingency of £1million to be added on if needed. Ann Budge 

told us later that because of some alterations the cost will be around £18 million. Now that’s fair enough as 

long as the contract is exactly what is needed and works for the business and customers. If at the end of the 

contract when the stadium is completely finished and the stadium isn’t working efficiently to the benefit of 

all the people who will use the new stand questions will have to be answered. I’d wait till the stand is completely 

finished before making a judgement on the standard of workmanship and the way the stand works for the 

fans, employees and functions.

 

[Manny1874]

On 23/05/2019 at 15:49, bn jambo said:

Better pic here.

 

 

The women's player reveals on the official site had some photos of what looks like the completed paint work on the tunnel. 

 

 

 

[ramrod]

3 hours ago, been here before said:

 

To be honest it looks like one of those AIDS information posters you got back in the mid 80s...

 

'Chris and Shaun are gay and so is their friend John...'.

But the would be in Hibs tops , surely ? 

[Kiwidoug]

For any of you who are a bit bored,  the dot.net mega stand thread is worth another look.  FoH and the new stand have really got them going.

[Jammy T]

On 11/06/2019 at 19:14, Notts1874 said:

What could we have done better with the time and money available then?

 

I recall somebody said that was the price a main contractor gave - rough calculations - these things cost what they cost and changes along the way add a bit more.

 

C’est la vie

[Independence]

On 11/06/2019 at 17:05, Cade said:

Spent money to get the stand open for matches as soon as possible.

Have then slowly completing it (and adding to original plans) as time and money have allowed.

Hearts have 100% done this the right way to avoid either playing a full season with three stands or spending untold thousands renting Murrayfield.

This!!! Common sense at last.

[Independence]

On 11/06/2019 at 21:05, FarmerTweedy said:

Firstly, the look of the front is entirely a matter of taste. You don't like it, lots of others do. Personally, I think if you're looking at it from right in front, it looks reasonably good but nothing special. If you look at it from towards either end it looks better, as you get a better impression of the curvature of it, and if you see it from a position where you get to see the reflection of either the old school or the tenements on a clear day with a blue sky, I think it looks absolutely stunning! It is, like I say, a matter of taste.

 

Secondly, and here's the real point I want to make here, you say that for £18m we could have done a lot better. Ignoring the fact that £18m has paid for improvements throughout the ground, including a new hybrid pitch, a temporary shop and ticket office in the Wheatfield, and new changing rooms in the Wheatfield, just what on earth do you base your assertion that we could do a lot better for the money spent on, exactly? Are you an expert in the construction industry, with detailed knowledge of the quantities of materials used in the construction and the costs of those materials, as well as the staff costs, plant hire costs, etc, or have you just decided we could do a lot better for the money because you don't like what we have done?

 

I've seen quite a number of people make claims about how we could or should have done better with various aspects of the stand over the life of this thread. I don't think any has offered any justification for their claim!

Totally agree. I believe it is great value for money controlled by wonderful strategic leadership.

[Bridge of Djoum]

1 hour ago, Independence said:

Totally agree. I believe it is great value for money controlled by wonderful strategic leadership.

[Vlad Magic]

Where is the £18 million costs to date coming from?

 

 

[Thomaso]

17 hours ago, Jammy T said:

 

I recall somebody said that was the price a main contractor gave - rough calculations 

 

That is correct.

[Jammy T]

1 minute ago, Cruickshank for Scotland said:

 

That is correct.

 

As an aside - apologies for the other thread.

 

Can’t seem to get back on it to post that on there....

 

??

[Whatever]

17 minutes ago, Vlad Magic said:

Where is the £18 million costs to date coming from?

 

 

 

Poppy charities and Bosnian pension funds m8.

 

[Thomaso]

17 minutes ago, Jammy T said:

 

As an aside - apologies for the other thread.

 

Can’t seem to get back on it to post that on there....

 

??

 

No problem JT ?

[sac]

47 minutes ago, Vlad Magic said:

Where is the £18 million costs to date coming from?

 

 

8000 mysterious benefactors.

[davemclaren]

3 minutes ago, sac said:

8000 mysterious benefactors.

Money laundering actually. Mrs Budge bought cheap infeeriur steal from the far east and resold it to Hearts at top quality steel prices. 

[Newton51]

Saw the infamous elevator to nowhere today at the big hearts family day. Is that for the sky lounge suites?

[Vlad Magic]

41 minutes ago, Whatever said:

 

Poppy charities and Bosnian pension funds m8.

 

 

 

Apologies I meant the confirmation of costs to date. I haven’t seen anything official saying it’s cost £18 mill?

[Whatever]

5 minutes ago, Vlad Magic said:

 

 

Apologies I meant the confirmation of costs to date. I haven’t seen anything official saying it’s cost £18 mill?

 I think AB herself has stated as such but don’t have a link to hand, sorry.

[gjcc]

8 minutes ago, Vlad Magic said:

 

 

Apologies I meant the confirmation of costs to date. I haven’t seen anything official saying it’s cost £18 mill?

 

https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/sport/football/hearts/hearts-owner-wants-highest-standards-as-tynecastle-upgrade-costs-hit-18m-1-4827850

[Cade]

The basic shell of the new main stand cost around 8mil.

Then it was up to Hearts to choose how to fill it.

As the finances of the club and FOH keep improving, the fixtures and fittings and number of corporate rooms is being increased.

We're spending more because we can afford more.

 

"Hertz costs spiraling" is what the EEN screams.

Hibs rag.

 

 

[luckydug]

On 11/06/2019 at 16:38, Big Slim Stylee said:

 

Can I ask why you have such a bee in your bonnet about people following English clubs? Their reasons are multiple - whether family, lived in the area, friends etc. - and if you love football, it’s also even  more enjoyable when you feel an attachment.

 

I lived right next to Stamford Bridge for 15 years and regularly went. 

 

I honestly can’t see the harm in it and your obsession of trying to childishly belittle people is...........strange.

I think our new stand is great.

BTW if you wish to discuss glory hunting football fans there is a seperate thread for that.

[iainmac]

15 hours ago, davemclaren said:

Money laundering actually. Mrs Budge bought cheap infeeriur steal from the far east and resold it to Hearts at top quality steel prices. 

 

They are now talking about yet another FOI request. This time to ECC to find out what our stadium capacity is! 

 

Can you imagine what kind of uninteresting existence you'd have to be living to even contemplate this kind of thing? ? ? 

[TyphoonJambo]

3 minutes ago, iainmac said:

 

They are now talking about yet another FOI request. This time to ECC to find out what our stadium capacity is! 

 

Can you imagine what kind of uninteresting existence you'd have to be living to even contemplate this kind of thing? ? ? 

got to fill in the time whilst their sisters have the painters in.

 

[davemclaren]

4 minutes ago, iainmac said:

 

They are now talking about yet another FOI request. This time to ECC to find out what our stadium capacity is! 

 

Can you imagine what kind of uninteresting existence you'd have to be living to even contemplate this kind of thing? ? ? 

Brilliant. Obsessed...not. ??

[Unknown user]

21 minutes ago, iainmac said:

 

They are now talking about yet another FOI request. This time to ECC to find out what our stadium capacity is! 

 

Can you imagine what kind of uninteresting existence you'd have to be living to even contemplate this kind of thing? ? ? 

 

We troll them just by existing

[Clerry Jambo]

Weirdos that dump has generally always been bigger than Tynie and had a greater capacity, so what are they trying to gloat about. 

[Sarah O]

Quality over quantity. Suck it up.

 

Tynie is streets ahead of ER in every aspect.

[Big Slim Stylee]

12 hours ago, luckydug said:

I think our new stand is great.

BTW if you wish to discuss glory hunting football fans there is a seperate thread for that.

 

Replying to a post of yours on this thread that again highlighted your weird obsession about how other fans enjoy their football.

 

Not my fault if you carry it on across multiple threads.

Edited June 17, 2019 by Big Slim Stylee

[Nobreath]

We've never been able to compete with Hibs when it comes to number of empty seats.