The main stand

[Taffin]

10 hours ago, kingantti1874 said:

that was actually the original design.. it was too expensive I think

 

The original mock ups where stunning.

[jamboinglasgow]

This may be impossible to do, but would love to see the pitch behind the Wheatfield turned into a mini stadium (seat maybe for 1000, using the changing rooms in the Wheatfield) so that it can be used for reserve/U18 games or the Women's team play there. Could also be rented out to small teams.

[graygo]

13 hours ago, Hectormasson said:

We've spent nearly 18 million  on the main stand,   which only gives us a capacity  of 19k odds, because of limited viewing seats?because of the jutted out police box thing,      we were 16k and a few hundred over before the new main stand,      alot of money to spend for 3&a half thousand more capacity,  than we had before it was built ? Although it improves the grounds look id still like to see us build roseburn stand higher and better at some point, 

 

The new stand was not just about adding to our capacity.

[David McCaig]

2 minutes ago, graygo said:

 

The new stand was not just about adding to our capacity.

 

It would be great to know how much revenue the restaurants and bars are creating at present... at a time when the football operation is effectively shutdown.

 

Hopefully the benefits of diversifying our business are starting to be seen.

[Francis Albert]

On 18/08/2020 at 05:33, David McCaig said:

https://shop.ndgraphics.com/product.htm?Product=YCT101&Source=RELATED

Not a huge fan of the current facade as some may recall but it has grown on me.  The original curtain wall design would have been superb but would have put us further in debt.

 Please spare us one of those horrible multi-coloured cartoon- like wrap thingies that look like something in a fun park. Horrible and horribly dated within a few years.

[Thomaso]

16 hours ago, Fraggle said:

Looking back at the pictures of the stand being built, and in particular when the glass started to go in, it looked really good without the caps and whatever the grey toning is on the lower panes on the upper floors. I remember reading on here the reasons for the caps and the grey tone glass (building regs/H&S right?), but always thought they looked  out of place and added to the 70's office block look. That's not a dig at Cruickshank, I'm sure the quality of work is top notch, just not as asthetically pleasing as it was when it just looked like one giant wall of glass mid install.

I don’t take it as a dig as my company was not responsible for the design and colour scheme - that was down to the Architect. Your comments are pretty accurate regarding H&S issues and Building Regs, however as was explained previously there was also a very tight programme to seal off the building with the glass facade to allow internal works to progress ASAP.

The biggest cock up was the Architect releasing a computer generated ‘fly over’ all glass facade to the public which was impractical to build in the time required and at a huge cost the Club could not afford. All this did was raise fans expectations and resulted in poor perceptions of the completed stand.

Edited August 20, 2020 by Thomaso

[Thomaso]

41 minutes ago, Taffin said:

 

The original mock ups where stunning.

Yes and impossible to build in the time required and at a huge cost that the Club could not afford.

[Thomaso]

13 hours ago, Hectormasson said:

We've spent nearly 18 million  on the main stand,   which only gives us a capacity  of 19k odds, because of limited viewing seats?because of the jutted out police box thing,      we were 16k and a few hundred over before the new main stand,      alot of money to spend for 3&a half thousand more capacity,  than we had before it was built ? Although it improves the grounds look id still like to see us build roseburn stand higher and better at some point, 

But it wasn’t just about increasing capacity was it. The money was also spent on demolition of the old stand and other buildings, the new plaza, 5 hospitality suites, state of the art changing rooms, press centre, TV studio, 5 hospitality lounges, fans bar, Club shop and a children’s nursery.

[Taffin]

4 minutes ago, Cruickshank for Scotland said:

Yes and impossible to build in the time required and at a huge cost that the Club could not afford.

 

I'm sure it was. Under promise, over deliver is always the best approach. 

 

I like people's suggestions of some kind of wraps for the glass, shame if that can't be done.

 

Can't wait to go back to the fans bar when the time comes. It seemed to get some stick but it's probably my favourite part of the new stand, I think it's excellent. Would be great if we could get another one on the stadium somewhere

[David McCaig]

25 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

Not a huge fan of the current facade as some may recall but it has grown on me.  The original curtain wall design would have been superb but would have put us further in debt.

 Please spare us one of those horrible multi-coloured cartoon- like wrap thingies that look like something in a fun park. Horrible and horribly dated within a few years.

Doesn’t necessarily have to be cartoonish, it could be something as simple as tinting the external view of the windows.

[Thomaso]

33 minutes ago, David McCaig said:

Doesn’t necessarily have to be cartoonish, it could be something as simple as tinting the external view of the windows.

How about the daylight and views for the hospitality guests?

[Beast Boy]

1 hour ago, jamboinglasgow said:

This may be impossible to do, but would love to see the pitch behind the Wheatfield turned into a mini stadium (seat maybe for 1000, using the changing rooms in the Wheatfield) so that it can be used for reserve/U18 games or the Women's team play there. Could also be rented out to small teams.

That’s what I was getting at in an earlier post. If we were ever able to buy the community pitch and the wee strip of warehouses that run alongside it. I realise that there’s a hell of a lot of reasons why that won’t happen, but it would be brilliant. Lesser Tynecastle. 

[jamboinglasgow]

1 hour ago, Beast Boy said:

That’s what I was getting at in an earlier post. If we were ever able to buy the community pitch and the wee strip of warehouses that run alongside it. I realise that there’s a hell of a lot of reasons why that won’t happen, but it would be brilliant. Lesser Tynecastle. 

 

Completely agree.

[TWF]

7 hours ago, jamboinglasgow said:

This may be impossible to do, but would love to see the pitch behind the Wheatfield turned into a mini stadium (seat maybe for 1000, using the changing rooms in the Wheatfield) so that it can be used for reserve/U18 games or the Women's team play there. Could also be rented out to small teams.

The Distillers and Planning Department (EDC) to name but 2 who would not agree

[pablo]

42 minutes ago, TWF said:

The Distillers and Planning Department (EDC) to name but 2 who would not agree

 

I think they mean if/when the industry up sticks and the land is rezoned. 

[OTT]

On 16/08/2020 at 23:27, Cruickshank for Scotland said:

We already have ‘Foundation Plaza’

 

Kept forgetting to reply to this. Apologies. 

 

The Foundation is a really unique selling point of the club. I really think as much attention needs to be drawn to it as possible. Its about strong branding and making sure the Foundation is something which remains a prominent feature of the club - a pledge for life. Fan ownership needs continued replenishment as fans unfortunately don't live forever, so its sort of a reminder to everyone going into the stadium why we have such a shiny new stand. Its about encouraging people who were kids during 2013 but are now adults and working to sort of take up the commitment so there is a continued long term support for the FOH. 

 

Ultimately, we have somewhere in the region of 8000 subs, so as the club continues to grow its important that we do everything we can to keep pushing that figure up and not allow any sort of drop off to occur. I think something as simple as renaming the stand and adding clear, visible lettering will help achieve that goal. 

 

[Thomaso]

1 hour ago, OTT said:

 

Kept forgetting to reply to this. Apologies. 

 

The Foundation is a really unique selling point of the club. I really think as much attention needs to be drawn to it as possible. Its about strong branding and making sure the Foundation is something which remains a prominent feature of the club - a pledge for life. Fan ownership needs continued replenishment as fans unfortunately don't live forever, so its sort of a reminder to everyone going into the stadium why we have such a shiny new stand. Its about encouraging people who were kids during 2013 but are now adults and working to sort of take up the commitment so there is a continued long term support for the FOH. 

 

Ultimately, we have somewhere in the region of 8000 subs, so as the club continues to grow its important that we do everything we can to keep pushing that figure up and not allow any sort of drop off to occur. I think something as simple as renaming the stand and adding clear, visible lettering will help achieve that goal. 

 

Personally I think naming the plaza Foundation Plaza is already pretty visible and a good acknowledgment.

The way to increase FoH donations is to get a winning team on the park IMO.

[Francis Albert]

3 hours ago, OTT said:

 

Kept forgetting to reply to this. Apologies. 

 

The Foundation is a really unique selling point of the club. I really think as much attention needs to be drawn to it as possible. Its about strong branding and making sure the Foundation is something which remains a prominent feature of the club - a pledge for life. Fan ownership needs continued replenishment as fans unfortunately don't live forever, so its sort of a reminder to everyone going into the stadium why we have such a shiny new stand. Its about encouraging people who were kids during 2013 but are now adults and working to sort of take up the commitment so there is a continued long term support for the FOH. 

 

Ultimately, we have somewhere in the region of 8000 subs, so as the club continues to grow its important that we do everything we can to keep pushing that figure up and not allow any sort of drop off to occur. I think something as simple as renaming the stand and adding clear, visible lettering will help achieve that goal. 

 

Whether fan ownership needs continuous replenishment in the form of continued long term financial input from FoH is a matter of choice of how FoH decides to organise itself and define membership. "Pledge for Life" was not any part of the original pledge. It was invented after the initial objective of saving the club and putting in place an agreement to transfer a majority of shares to FoH. As a club we need to reach far beyond FoH subscribers if we are to reach our potential. An overemphasis on FoH being "the fans" who own the club is restrictive. I would open up the definition of fans and fan ownership more widely. 

As a founding member of FoH and a Main Stand ST holder I no more want to sit in the "Foundation Stand" than I would want Tynie to be renamed the "Foundation Stadium" or "Foundation Park".

[Jambo-Fox]

5 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

Whether fan ownership needs continuous replenishment in the form of continued long term financial input from FoH is a matter of choice of how FoH decides to organise itself and define membership. "Pledge for Life" was not any part of the original pledge. It was invented after the initial objective of saving the club and putting in place an agreement to transfer a majority of shares to FoH. As a club we need to reach far beyond FoH subscribers if we are to reach our potential. An overemphasis on FoH being "the fans" who own the club is restrictive. I would open up the definition of fans and fan ownership more widely. 

As a founding member of FoH and a Main Stand ST holder I no more want to sit in the "Foundation Stand" than I would want Tynie to be renamed the "Foundation Stadium" or "Foundation Park".

Interesting and good points.

 

FOH approximately 8,000 subscribers.

 

Hearts Season Ticket Holders 11,000

 

Average crowds at Tynie 18,000

 

Shareholders ... not sure how many

 

Scottish Cup Parades 250,000+

Potential massive!

 

That’s all folks!

[Notts1874]

16 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

Whether fan ownership needs continuous replenishment in the form of continued long term financial input from FoH is a matter of choice of how FoH decides to organise itself and define membership. "Pledge for Life" was not any part of the original pledge. It was invented after the initial objective of saving the club and putting in place an agreement to transfer a majority of shares to FoH. As a club we need to reach far beyond FoH subscribers if we are to reach our potential. An overemphasis on FoH being "the fans" who own the club is restrictive. I would open up the definition of fans and fan ownership more widely. 

As a founding member of FoH and a Main Stand ST holder I no more want to sit in the "Foundation Stand" than I would want Tynie to be renamed the "Foundation Stadium" or "Foundation Park".

Maybe you could have put those points across in the 121 meeting you were invited to, but no you continue to snipe from the sidelines. 

Yes I know you will come back with your usual that you communicate in other ways but you were offered a unique opportunity and turned it down. 

You know how you can change FOH? Put your mouth where your money is and put your head above the parapet for once. You could stand for election to the board. 

[Francis Albert]

6 minutes ago, Notts1874 said:

Maybe you could have put those points across in the 121 meeting you were invited to, but no you continue to snipe from the sidelines. 

Yes I know you will come back with your usual that you communicate in other ways but you were offered a unique opportunity and turned it down. 

You know how you can change FOH? Put your mouth where your money is and put your head above the parapet for once. You could stand for election to the board. 

Which 121 meeting? What "unique opportunity"?

As it is I am putting my points on this forum as we all do. And I don't see that I am "sniping". Just expressing a view.

For what it is worth  I have expressed my views directly to FoH in response to their consultations.

[Notts1874]

3 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

Which 121 meeting? What "unique opportunity"?

As it is I am putting my points on this forum as we all do. And I don't see that I am "sniping". Just expressing a view.

For what it is worth  I have expressed my views directly to FoH in response to their consultations.

You know and I know you were offered a face to face meeting with Stuart. Don't deny it  otherwise I will make you look silly 

[Byyy The Light]

4 hours ago, OTT said:

 

Kept forgetting to reply to this. Apologies. 

 

The Foundation is a really unique selling point of the club. I really think as much attention needs to be drawn to it as possible. Its about strong branding and making sure the Foundation is something which remains a prominent feature of the club - a pledge for life. Fan ownership needs continued replenishment as fans unfortunately don't live forever, so its sort of a reminder to everyone going into the stadium why we have such a shiny new stand. Its about encouraging people who were kids during 2013 but are now adults and working to sort of take up the commitment so there is a continued long term support for the FOH. 

 

Ultimately, we have somewhere in the region of 8000 subs, so as the club continues to grow its important that we do everything we can to keep pushing that figure up and not allow any sort of drop off to occur. I think something as simple as renaming the stand and adding clear, visible lettering will help achieve that goal. 

 

Nice one 👍🏼

[Bazzas right boot]

We should continue to save foh contributions over the next 4/5 years. 

 

Then when big Yankee doodle dandy Ron get bored, complete Mercers unfinished business. 

 

 

[Harry Potter]

13 hours ago, Francis Albert said:

Whether fan ownership needs continuous replenishment in the form of continued long term financial input from FoH is a matter of choice of how FoH decides to organise itself and define membership. "Pledge for Life" was not any part of the original pledge. It was invented after the initial objective of saving the club and putting in place an agreement to transfer a majority of shares to FoH. As a club we need to reach far beyond FoH subscribers if we are to reach our potential. An overemphasis on FoH being "the fans" who own the club is restrictive. I would open up the definition of fans and fan ownership more widely. 

As a founding member of FoH and a Main Stand ST holder I no more want to sit in the "Foundation Stand" than I would want Tynie to be renamed the "Foundation Stadium" or "Foundation Park".

Im a deffo for pledge for life, i would think most FOH members are as well.

[stirlo]

I like the new stand and think it looks fine - but I do think the project was badly managed and a better end result could have been achieved for the money spent.

 

It is never a good idea to build something in a huge hurry and without designs being anywhere near complete. The issue with the corporate seats having to be moved and the addition of the television studio are just two examples of things that should have been thought of before. I also feel they should have gone for closer to a 9,000 or 10,000 capacity. 

 

For a club that is soon to be fan-owned I felt the extent that the project was shrouded in secrecy at the design-stage was somewhat curious.

[Gizmo]

9 minutes ago, stirlo said:

I like the new stand and think it looks fine - but I do think the project was badly managed and a better end result could have been achieved for the money spent.

 

It is never a good idea to build something in a huge hurry and without designs being anywhere near complete. The issue with the corporate seats having to be moved and the addition of the television studio are just two examples of things that should have been thought of before. I also feel they should have gone for closer to a 9,000 or 10,000 capacity. 

 

For a club that is soon to be fan-owned I felt the extent that the project was shrouded in secrecy at the design-stage was somewhat curious.

We had a limited window to seize the opportunity. 

[davemclaren]

13 minutes ago, stirlo said:

I like the new stand and think it looks fine - but I do think the project was badly managed and a better end result could have been achieved for the money spent.

 

It is never a good idea to build something in a huge hurry and without designs being anywhere near complete. The issue with the corporate seats having to be moved and the addition of the television studio are just two examples of things that should have been thought of before. I also feel they should have gone for closer to a 9,000 or 10,000 capacity. 

 

For a club that is soon to be fan-owned I felt the extent that the project was shrouded in secrecy at the design-stage was somewhat curious.

Do you accept that the huge rush to do it was necessary?

[stirlo]

24 minutes ago, davemclaren said:

Do you accept that the huge rush to do it was necessary?

 

It is evident that the old stand needed replacing but I would have preferred to play a few more matches - or even a whole season - at Murrayfield if it meant getting things right.  

[Francis Albert]

1 hour ago, Harry Potter said:

Im a deffo for pledge for life, i would think most FOH members are as well.

So am I . But there are lots of Hearts fans (the majority in fact)  who aren't and I think need to be recognised in any "fan ownership" system. Just my opinion, not "sniping from the sidelines" as Nots 1874 colourfully put it.

[Francis Albert]

38 minutes ago, davemclaren said:

Do you accept that the huge rush to do it was necessary?

It was probably the right decision to replace it but the rush was exaggerated. And in retrospect (always a useful tool)  the scale and timing of the replacement probably a mistake. It was costing more to maintain but not as much as often quoted and still less than the new stand costs to maintain. Fulham, Dundee and many other clubs still operate with stands of similar vintage. 

 

Anyway it is done and we have to get on with it. 

[Selkirkhmfc1874]

Costs to maintain new stand are dwarfed by income it generates through bigger and better hospitality suites , increased capacity aswell as bar etc

[Rods]

13 hours ago, Smith's right boot said:

We should continue to save foh contributions over the next 4/5 years. 

 

Then when big Yankee doodle dandy Ron get bored, complete Mercers unfinished business. 

 

 

 

Fantastic idea.

[Thomaso]

1 hour ago, stirlo said:

I like the new stand and think it looks fine - but I do think the project was badly managed and a better end result could have been achieved for the money spent.

 

It is never a good idea to build something in a huge hurry and without designs being anywhere near complete. The issue with the corporate seats having to be moved and the addition of the television studio are just two examples of things that should have been thought of before. I also feel they should have gone for closer to a 9,000 or 10,000 capacity. 

 

For a club that is soon to be fan-owned I felt the extent that the project was shrouded in secrecy at the design-stage was somewhat curious.

Hardly rocket science to acknowledge that it would have been preferable to build the stand with firm Architects construction details finalised and to a reasonable construction programme - but that was not the position the Club found itself.

As fully explained in the vast new stand thread, the Council were about to press the button on a new nursery and had committed to a completion date with the parents. If that had gone ahead that would have kyboshed forever the chance of building a new stand with the facilities we required.

[Thomaso]

10 minutes ago, Selkirkhmfc1874 said:

Costs to maintain new stand are dwarfed by income it generates through bigger and better hospitality suites , increased capacity aswell as bar etc

Also the costs of repairs, maintenance and ongoing compliance with H&S requirements of the old stand was crippling!

Edited August 21, 2020 by Thomaso

[Thomaso]

17 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

It was probably the right decision to replace it but the rush was exaggerated. And in retrospect (always a useful tool)  the scale and timing of the replacement probably a mistake. It was costing more to maintain but not as much as often quoted and still less than the new stand costs to maintain. Fulham, Dundee and many other clubs still operate with stands of similar vintage. 

 

Anyway it is done and we have to get on with it. 

In what way was the rush exaggerated? You are aware of the deadline to hand over the nursery?

[Thomaso]

1 hour ago, Gizmo said:

We had a limited window to seize the opportunity. 

Some just don’t seize the reality of that fact!

[Francis Albert]

14 hours ago, Notts1874 said:

You know and I know you were offered a face to face meeting with Stuart. Don't deny it  otherwise I will make you look silly 

Apologies. I had partaken of alcohol when you posted last night. It took me a little while to work out what you meant by a 121 meeting, thinking it might be a new FoH forum I hadn't heard of. Then "ah one to one" dawned. I do now recall having an invite to meet Stuart a couple of years ago. Not sure why I declined - living over 400 miles from Edinburgh, a reluctance to be an "insider", a feeling I'd expressed my views pretty clearly  all probably played a part. 

It is not the first time I have had the "unique opportunity" to meet a FoH board member - another director five or more years ago invited me to meet him in Merchie Hearts so he could "put me right on a few things" (I paraphrase but not much). 

I don't think I was sniping just expressing an opinion. The response "why don't you stand for the board?" is one of the more puerile responses to an opinion you disagree with. 

As for fear of making me look silly ... as with many posters looking silly is a price you pay  for posting and I am happy times to pay it.

 

[Francis Albert]

1 minute ago, Cruickshank for Scotland said:

In what way was the rush exaggerated? You are aware of the deadline to hand over the nursery?

AS I think was clear I was referring to the maintenance cost issue

Maybe the nursery hand-over drove the whole thing and quickly building our £24m plus stand was the only option. I don't know.

[Gizmo]

2 hours ago, Cruickshank for Scotland said:

Some just don’t seize the reality of that fact!

Given the considerable constraints, I think the club, the contractors including your goodself, the project, the fans and FoH pulled together admirably. Like all projects it had its road bumps, which would have been more easily absorbed without the time constraints worked under. 

Still, even now the usual dullards want to have their pound of flesh long after the event. 

I get a lot of pride walking up to it and I absolutely love sitting in it. 

 

[Guest ToqueJambo]

4 minutes ago, Gizmo said:

Given the considerable constraints, I think the club, the contractors including your goodself, the project, the fans and FoH pulled together admirably. Like all projects it had its road bumps, which would have been more easily absorbed without the time constraints worked under. 

Still, even now the usual dullards want to have their pound of flesh long after the event. 

I get a lot of pride walking up to it and I absolutely love sitting in it. 

 

 

Put it this way, given the current situation if Budge hadn't prioritised the stand it may not have got done for a very long time. Like Aberdeen and their new stadium that will probably never happen now.

 

Now we've got time to finish off the details and should have everything in place for when things get back to normal. It'll pay for itself many times over in the decades to come. 

[Thomaso]

7 minutes ago, ToqueJambo said:

 

Put it this way, given the current situation if Budge hadn't prioritised the stand it may not have got done for a very long time. Like Aberdeen and their new stadium that will probably never happen now.

 

Now we've got time to finish off the details and should have everything in place for when things get back to normal. It'll pay for itself many times over in the decades to come. 

If Budge hadn’t prioritised the new stand a nursery would be there obstructing any future development.

[Thomaso]

2 hours ago, Francis Albert said:

AS I think was clear I was referring to the maintenance cost issue

Maybe the nursery hand-over drove the whole thing and quickly building our £24m plus stand was the only option. I don't know.

I know.

[Guest ToqueJambo]

2 hours ago, Francis Albert said:

AS I think was clear I was referring to the maintenance cost issue

Maybe the nursery hand-over drove the whole thing and quickly building our £24m plus stand was the only option. I don't know.

 

Would you prefer to still have doubts over Tynecastle as our home or that money? I don't know where that figure comes from, but couldn't care less. Delighted a lot of my FoH payment went towards it. The fact is we have built a stand without going into massive debt. That's almost unheard of in football.

[Bazzas right boot]

3 hours ago, Cruickshank for Scotland said:

Hardly rocket science to acknowledge that it would have been preferable to build the stand with firm Architects construction details finalised and to a reasonable construction programme - but that was not the position the Club found itself.

As fully explained in the vast new stand thread, the Council were about to press the button on a new nursery and had committed to a completion date with the parents. If that had gone ahead that would have kyboshed forever the chance of building a new stand with the facilities we required.

 

 

You're good on these threads, full of information, sense and logic. 

 

What happens to you when you talk about football and Hearts ? 

[Francis Albert]

20 minutes ago, Cruickshank for Scotland said:

I know.

Did we offer half a million or one million to delay the handover of the nursery by a year? I don't know but was the decision really that black and white? Would it have been impossible to build a new stand with the old nursery in place? Or to pay to move it to the large largely wasted space of Foundation Square?

Edited August 21, 2020 by Francis Albert

[Guest ToqueJambo]

7 minutes ago, Smith's right boot said:

 

 

You're good on these threads, full of information, sense and logic. 

 

What happens to you when you talk about football and Hearts ? 

 

Craig Levein happened 😆

[Francis Albert]

6 minutes ago, ToqueJambo said:

 

Would you prefer to still have doubts over Tynecastle as our home or that money? I don't know where that figure comes from, but couldn't care less. Delighted a lot of my FoH payment went towards it. The fact is we have built a stand without going into massive debt. That's almost unheard of in football.

The figure is a conservative estimate of the final cost of the new stand based on numbers provided by the club. 

It is not a question of retaining Tynie or spending £24 million or anything like that much.

[Bazzas right boot]

2 minutes ago, ToqueJambo said:

 

Craig Levein happened 😆

 

😳, broke him. 

[Francis Albert]

26 minutes ago, Cruickshank for Scotland said:

I know.

The new stand as and when built was the only.option?

Edited August 21, 2020 by Francis Albert