TYNECASTLE STADIUM UPGRADE POTENTIAL - UEFA category 4 granted ( updated/merged )

[cliffdanum]

Any expansion at Tynecastle must incorporate a larger playing surface. Personally, pipe dream fantasy, I would like to see 35k, tight against pitch as is now but rebuild totally with Gorgie Stand starting about 20yards further forward than current position pushing ground further to the North. Costly tho.

[davemclaren]

1 minute ago, cliffdanum said:

Any expansion at Tynecastle must incorporate a larger playing surface. Personally, pipe dream fantasy, I would like to see 35k, tight against pitch as is now but rebuild totally with Gorgie Stand starting about 20yards further forward than current position pushing ground further to the North. Costly tho.

Basically a completely new stadium. 

[cliffdanum]

1 minute ago, davemclaren said:

Basically a completely new stadium. 

Yep..100%..Scotland as a whole has nothing that size..its crying out for something..the potential is unlimited..

[davemclaren]

6 minutes ago, cliffdanum said:

Yep..100%..Scotland as a whole has nothing that size..its crying out for something..the potential is unlimited..

Only cost £100m or so. Cheaper moving elsewhere. 

[Jambo-Fox]

1 hour ago, OTT said:

 

One club I quite like looking at with we talk about capacity is Bristol City. Their city is smaller than Edinburgh and also contains a big team and wee team, they've recently renovated their stadium from 21k to 27k (development works took place 2014-16). In 13/14 before the works started their average attendance was 11.9k, its now around 20k which is a huge increase in about 8 years. They don't have the benefit of derbies or playing the largest clubs in their division twice at home which would obviously boost that average up further. Our starting point right now is 16/17k. I think we could break 20k pretty easily if we had the capacity.

 

I agree with your point about the glee some folk seem to take in shooting this thread down (but continually come back despite labelling it ridiculous and such). I don't think having a desire to see the club capitalise on its growth and aim higher is a bad thing. Consolidating 3rd is a tough ask when our resources are pretty similar to the clubs beneath us. Being able to add on another couple million per season would be huge in creating a gulf that they couldn't ordinarily close. 

I was in Bristol recently great city!
I think the population of Bristol and Edinburgh cities are very similar but if you compare the ‘metro’ areas Bristol is by far the greater.

[davemclaren]

2 minutes ago, Jambo-Fox said:

I was in Bristol recently great city!
I think the population of Bristol and Edinburgh cities are very similar but if you compare the ‘metro’ areas Bristol is by far the greater.

People forget this with English towns/cities and their clubs. Significantly less clubs per head of population plus they don’t have the same ‘sectarian effect’. 

[cliffdanum]

6 minutes ago, davemclaren said:

Only cost £100m or so. Cheaper moving elsewhere. 

Agree..but Gorgie or the Gyle..I know where I choose

[davemclaren]

Just now, cliffdanum said:

Agree..but Gorgie or the Gyle..I know where I choose

I don’t disagree. 😄

[OTT]

1 hour ago, Jambo-Fox said:

I was in Bristol recently great city!
I think the population of Bristol and Edinburgh cities are very similar but if you compare the ‘metro’ areas Bristol is by far the greater.

 

Thats interesting and not something I'd considered. I had a wee look and it looks like its around 620k (Greater Bristol Area?) - Edinburgh and the Lothians population is around 850k. Appreciate Similar to the Lothians, there may be other areas to include, but broadly speaking it doesn't look like Edinburgh and Bristol are miles apart in terms of population. 

 

The sectarian effect Dave is talking about, I wonder how much of that is just good old fashioned glory hunting? Like, if Hearts had been better managed over the last 3 decades where would we be instead? The Robinson years didn't really achieve much, Vlad came in and refused to create the stability needed for success and now that Budge has came in we're finally actually moving forward after years of stagnation. I think as we're seeing folk are there and willing to back the club, but the club needs to show a level of competence that hasn't really been there until Savage has came in. I think in the seasons to come we're going to be dealing with the same problem of more fans than we have seats, and it would be great to know the club is starting to think about things - and BTW this is fantastic problem to have, but logically, the club will put the ticket prices up as demand outstrips supply, expansion would remove the need to increase ticket prices and get more fans in which ultimately would be a better outcome IMO. 

 

The other thing, why are we planning for/assuming failure? Like, why are we saying if we say, doubled the Wheatfield that we'd have 5k seats we couldn't sell? Why not look at it as 5k extra fans to try and get in? You'll get them anyway against Hibs, Celtic and Rangers, you'll break 20k in your sleep against Aberdeen and you're selling those seats in Europe too, so why not look at the games against the sides below us as a great chance to carry over the support that would turn up to watch us in those Cat A games? 

[soonbe110]

4 hours ago, David McCaig said:

19 home games x £20 is £1.5m.

 

This would rise to £1.8m in a season like this.

 

Those figures rise upwards of £2m at £30 per ticket.

Average price won’t be as much as £20 to the club though as the extra seats unlikely to be Platinum. 
The mix of fans at our home games is something like 65% on concession tickets of some sort either o65 or various u18 categories. 20% vat has to be deducted from all ticket sale prices. 
We won’t sell out 19 home league games in any season either so unlikely the extra seats will be fully utilised.  
That’s how I got my number 

[soonbe110]

5 hours ago, David McCaig said:

In the short term we need to do everything possible to avoid becoming landlocked.

 

Long term the goal should be how do we get to 30k whilst remaining at Tynecastle.

 

If that is unachievable in any circumstances, contingency planning has to start for a move elsewhere at some point.

 

 

I’d think 30k on the current site is highly improbable given current day planning and H&S regs. Maybe a change to the current thinking around safe standing could get us an extra 2-3k but even that’s a stretch. We are landlocked by  2 schools, distillery and housing as it stands.  There may be a change with the old school site but not sure how that would help us build a bigger stadium.  It’s a tough one because a move to a green field site would probably cost well in excess of £50m so funding would be a huge issue. 

[stirlo]

4 hours ago, OldGorgie said:

Having watched the club since early 60’s, my main concern is making sure the ground suits our average attendance. Crowds are fickle and it’s not long ago when both Hearts and Rangers had crowds of less than 10,000. Clearly that situation is quite different now but a full stadium works better than a half empty one. For what it’s worth I prefer the current setup.

 

You have to go back decades now since we regularly had attendances of under 10,000. Ever since the redevelopment of Tynecastle in the mid-90s we've been averaging above that and the last 15-20 years we've rarely been below at least 13,000 for league games. As for Rangers, you'd probably have to go back to the early to mid-80s since they last had less than 10,000 for a league game.

[Hearts_fan]

5 hours ago, OTT said:

 

One club I quite like looking at with we talk about capacity is Bristol City. Their city is smaller than Edinburgh and also contains a big team and wee team, they've recently renovated their stadium from 21k to 27k (development works took place 2014-16). In 13/14 before the works started their average attendance was 11.9k, its now around 20k which is a huge increase in about 8 years. They don't have the benefit of derbies or playing the largest clubs in their division twice at home which would obviously boost that average up further. Our starting point right now is 16/17k. I think we could break 20k pretty easily if we had the capacity.

 

I agree with your point about the glee some folk seem to take in shooting this thread down (but continually come back despite labelling it ridiculous and such). I don't think having a desire to see the club capitalise on its growth and aim higher is a bad thing. Consolidating 3rd is a tough ask when our resources are pretty similar to the clubs beneath us. Being able to add on another couple million per season would be huge in creating a gulf that they couldn't ordinarily close. 

 

Exactly. The only way to enable growth in attendance is the provision of capacity.

[Hearts_fan]

6 hours ago, davemclaren said:

It could but if our average attendance was 23,000 in a 30,000 I would hazard we would have over invested in capacity. 

 

If the average was 23,000 in a 30,000 capacity, then the average would be less than 23,000 in a 25,000 capacity. 

[Watt-Zeefuik]

9 hours ago, Allowayjambo1874 said:

I think you are forgetting the away support in all these matches which were vastly inflated by the novelty of playing at Murrayfield. My recollection is there were roughly 22k Hearts fans at each of those games, not exactly a huge amount more than we get at Tynecastle given when there were zero restriction on tickets for Murrayfield.

 

We would all like a bigger stadium but most people recognise there is a balance to be had cost v return and in our case how logistically we can do it on current site as moving completely would result in astronomical outlay. 

 

22k Hearts fans at the Aberdeen and Rangers games is a pretty good indication that we could routinely fill a 25k seat Tynecastle at bigger games. That's not saying it's feasible to build but in terms of ideal sizes, that says a lot.

 

7 hours ago, SwindonJambo said:

There aren’t half some delusional fantasists around. The club is progressing and growing well, after a tough few years, we’ve had 2 years of growth and our first European qualification for 6 years. I think most of us are happy with the current direction but talk of a 25,000 or 30,000 stadium that we’d only fill for big games is just silly at present. Massively Cost prohibitive (We’re talking tens of millions - who pays for that???) for starters and we’d have to move for that kind of capacity. Planning permission would be an issue too.

 

The overwhelming majority of sports stadia in the world are only full for big games. Dortmund don't fill the Westfalonstadion for every mid-table match in January. It's great for atmosphere to have a stadium that's effectively packed to the gills every time out, but it leaves a lot of cash on the table.

 

6 hours ago, soonbe110 said:

Unlikely to be any viable options Dave. Even if we managed to get an extra 4,000 seats that only just over £1m extra income per season if they are sold for every game. Payback time on  any significant investment would be decades. Add that to the spiralling costs of construction at the moment and a Wheatfield rebuild would probably cost even more than  the Main stand cost us. 

 

"Only" £1m extra income per season? If there were room to add  and no structural issues and no planning costs, an extra 4k seats—say as a cantilevered  stuck on top the Wheatfiled—that could probably be done for around £8-10m, even with inflation, which would be paid back in 10 years and then be new revenue and capacity after that.

 

As it is there are definite structural and planning issues that make this complicated, which is why we're not doing it today.

 

5 hours ago, hughesie27 said:

Thinking that we are anywhere near a position to further develop Tynecastle is a pipedream.

You can aspire till the cows come home of you like. It doesn't change the fact that discussing it just now is a waste of time.

 

It's not a pipedream, it's just not currently feasible for our budget. But our budget looks to be expanding. Regular group stage participation could get us there a lot sooner than some think.

[Hearts_fan]

Leaving aside other limitations such as space or finance, because – as if it wasn't obvious already – this is a hypothetical discussion, capacity of a stadium should be driven by what the maximum potential match attendance could be, not the current average.

 

If you don't cater for the maximum, the consequence is a lower average.

 

Remember, average is simply the total number of bums on seats per season divided by the number of matches. 

 

Say there are 6 matches a season which already today could sell 30,000, but you think 19,000 is enough (because it covers our current average), then 60,000 tickets at £25 a pop are not being sold when they could be. And those 60,000 sales push up the average attendance figure to well above 19,000 as things stand.

 

That's not to mention the other matches which could sell more than 19,000, and they would also increase the average.

 

To all the nae sayers and folk who dismiss the subject as a "pipedream" (what worthy goal in football was not at one stage a pipedream?), it is one thing to acknowledge that there are physical and financial obstacles in the path of stadium development, but it is an ENTIRELY different thing to be a nae-saying, low-ambition, frankly depressing cynic who apparently takes smug pleasure in calling the idea of a better Tynecastle a "pipedream". 

Edited August 21, 2022 by Hearts_fan

[Sooks]

9 hours ago, FFSJohn said:

Gimme a break! 

Whats up John ?

[FarmerTweedy]

6 hours ago, davemclaren said:

I think we will likely only have one realistic ( and I’m probably stretching the term ) option of preventing being landlocked soon.  

Right everyone, get yourselves on zoopla and get looking for any tenement flats that come up for sale on Gorgie Road!  That's obviously the plan, buy all the tenements and then we can knock them down and expand south! 😃

[davemclaren]

Just now, FarmerTweedy said:

Right everyone, get yourselves on zoopla and get looking for any tenement flats that come up for sale on Gorgie Road!  That's obviously the plan, buy all the tenements and then we can knock them down and expand south! 😃

Could be a plan. 🤣

[Newton51]

Only one screen up today from someone at the performance today. Maybe the damaged in transit story was true

[soonbe110]

1 hour ago, Led Tasso said:

 

22k Hearts fans at the Aberdeen and Rangers games is a pretty good indication that we could routinely fill a 25k seat Tynecastle at bigger games. That's not saying it's feasible to build but in terms of ideal sizes, that says a lot.

 

 

The overwhelming majority of sports stadia in the world are only full for big games. Dortmund don't fill the Westfalonstadion for every mid-table match in January. It's great for atmosphere to have a stadium that's effectively packed to the gills every time out, but it leaves a lot of cash on the table.

 

 

"Only" £1m extra income per season? If there were room to add  and no structural issues and no planning costs, an extra 4k seats—say as a cantilevered  stuck on top the Wheatfiled—that could probably be done for around £8-10m, even with inflation, which would be paid back in 10 years and then be new revenue and capacity after that.

 

As it is there are definite structural and planning issues that make this complicated, which is why we're not doing it today.

 

 

It's not a pipedream, it's just not currently feasible for our budget. But our budget looks to be expanding. Regular group stage participation could get us there a lot sooner than some think.

Not a chance that any cantilever on top of Wheatfield could be done for £8-10m.  Any project like that would incur professional fees of £2-3m for a start. 
Real problem with your idea however is that planning permission highly unlikely due to impact on surrounding housing.  We could buy all the housing to solve the problem but that more than eats up your initial £8-10m 

[soonbe110]

1 hour ago, Hearts_fan said:

Leaving aside other limitations such as space or finance, because – as if it wasn't obvious already – this is a hypothetical discussion, capacity of a stadium should be driven by what the maximum potential match attendance could be, not the current average.

 

If you don't cater for the maximum, the consequence is a lower average.

 

Remember, average is simply the total number of bums on seats per season divided by the number of matches. 

 

Say there are 6 matches a season which already today could sell 30,000, but you think 19,000 is enough (because it covers our current average), then 60,000 tickets at £25 a pop are not being sold when they could be. And those 60,000 sales push up the average attendance figure to well above 19,000 as things stand.

 

That's not to mention the other matches which could sell more than 19,000, and they would also increase the average.

 

To all the nae sayers and folk who dismiss the subject as a "pipedream" (what worthy goal in football was not at one stage a pipedream?), it is one thing to acknowledge that there are physical and financial obstacles in the path of stadium development, but it is an ENTIRELY different thing to be a nae-saying, low-ambition, frankly depressing cynic who apparently takes smug pleasure in calling the idea of a better Tynecastle a "pipedream". 

Averages, averages, averages.  Our average home ticket revenue is nothing like £25 per seat. Well below that. That knocks your £1.5m on the head.  Easiest way to increase our annual revenue by £1.5m is to increase prices by £5 per game. Majority of fans currently going to games at tynie are contributing less than £20 per game to Hearts. Indeed many only contribute £10 per game max. 

[SwindonJambo]

1 hour ago, Led Tasso said:

 

22k Hearts fans at the Aberdeen and Rangers games is a pretty good indication that we could routinely fill a 25k seat Tynecastle at bigger games. That's not saying it's feasible to build but in terms of ideal sizes, that says a lot.

 

 

The overwhelming majority of sports stadia in the world are only full for big games. Dortmund don't fill the Westfalonstadion for every mid-table match in January. It's great for atmosphere to have a stadium that's effectively packed to the gills every time out, but it leaves a lot of cash on the table.

 

 

"Only" £1m extra income per season? If there were room to add  and no structural issues and no planning costs, an extra 4k seats—say as a cantilevered  stuck on top the Wheatfiled—that could probably be done for around £8-10m, even with inflation, which would be paid back in 10 years and then be new revenue and capacity after that.

 

As it is there are definite structural and planning issues that make this complicated, which is why we're not doing it today.

 

 

It's not a pipedream, it's just not currently feasible for our budget. But our budget looks to be expanding. Regular group stage participation could get us there a lot sooner than some think.

It was 18k Hearts fans at the games at Murrayfield v Aberdeen and Rangers in 2017. Crowds were 24,000 and 32,000 respectively and away supports were 6,000 and 14:000 respectively. I was at the Rangers game. Not nice to listen to their hideous songbook but we made a tidy sum from them.

 

The budget does look to be growing but we have to sustain that growth over a number of years and let’s hope we can. It’s our first season in Europe for 6 years and people are getting ahead of themselves and getting carried away. We’ll need to be at our best to go through on Thursday night. Stadium expansion is extremely expensive and awkward in our current abode and all the more so with spiralling inflation and building costs. Games are nominally sold out but there are visible empty seats at every game. The new ticket exchange scheme is a good start and hopefully it will be well used.

[Hearts_fan]

1 hour ago, soonbe110 said:

Averages, averages, averages.  Our average home ticket revenue is nothing like £25 per seat. Well below that. That knocks your £1.5m on the head.  Easiest way to increase our annual revenue by £1.5m is to increase prices by £5 per game. Majority of fans currently going to games at tynie are contributing less than £20 per game to Hearts. Indeed many only contribute £10 per game max. 

Why stop at £5 extra? If you charged everyone £100 extra per match, we’d need a new trophy cabinet.

 

In fact, why not reduce capacity by 50% and charge most fluent double and lock out those who can’t afford it. 
 

we could make each seat twice as wide to accommodate the fat erses of the wealthiest. 
 

seems like the easiest solution to me.

[Watt-Zeefuik]

3 hours ago, soonbe110 said:

Not a chance that any cantilever on top of Wheatfield could be done for £8-10m.  Any project like that would incur professional fees of £2-3m for a start. 
Real problem with your idea however is that planning permission highly unlikely due to impact on surrounding housing.  We could buy all the housing to solve the problem but that more than eats up your initial £8-10m 

 

I've done this all the way down to the details elsewhere in the thread, but yes, as I tried to allude, there are very good reasons you can't do the cantilever idea at Tynecastle, including structural and planning issues. The biggest problem is the ethanol safety issues at NBDC, and that we built the main stand to accommodate exactly how many seats we were allowed under COMAH restrictions.

 

I don't think the housing is an issue because there's a lot of space behind the Wheatfield and it's mostly distillery and old school that would fall in its shadow. We'd have to get some land from NBDC but it's just community pitch right now.

 

Long story short, my prediction is that in 10-15 years we'll spend £40-50m to solve the ethanol issues, purchase land, and expand the Wheatfield by 8-10k seats or so. IMO that's far and away the most cost effective expansion we'll be able to manage, much cheaper than a new stadium from scratch elsewhere.

[Mysterion]

19 hours ago, davemclaren said:

We’ll find out soon enough I imagine. If there are significant barriers to having housing there than it should certainly lower the value of the land.  
 

I’m sure that the board are monitoring the situation closely. 

 

I've been moaning about this for ages throughout this and other threads.

 

Whilst I wouldn't be surprised if the council waived through planning permission, I would be disappointed if the ethanol tank restriction was not viewed as an issue. To have massive tanks in close proximity just seems crazy. 

 

If the application is rejected then perhaps there's a compromise to be made. I think any development probably needs Hearts to facilitate it (through the tank move). 

 

The compromise might be to obtain a section of land to support an expanded Roseburn stand. 

 

My ideal scenario is to outright purchase the school land, have all non listed elements removed so the club creates match day parking and the building is used for heritage purposes. I'd also be happy if Hearts did something through big Hearts should they be able to create some sort of affordable accommodation.  

 

 

[soonbe110]

7 hours ago, Led Tasso said:

 

I've done this all the way down to the details elsewhere in the thread, but yes, as I tried to allude, there are very good reasons you can't do the cantilever idea at Tynecastle, including structural and planning issues. The biggest problem is the ethanol safety issues at NBDC, and that we built the main stand to accommodate exactly how many seats we were allowed under COMAH restrictions.

 

I don't think the housing is an issue because there's a lot of space behind the Wheatfield and it's mostly distillery and old school that would fall in its shadow. We'd have to get some land from NBDC but it's just community pitch right now.

 

Long story short, my prediction is that in 10-15 years we'll spend £40-50m to solve the ethanol issues, purchase land, and expand the Wheatfield by 8-10k seats or so. IMO that's far and away the most cost effective expansion we'll be able to manage, much cheaper than a new stadium from scratch elsewhere.

Could be, hopefully the club has grown to the point it’s needed and can fund it. 

[Mysterion]

8 hours ago, Led Tasso said:

Long story short, my prediction is that in 10-15 years we'll spend £40-50m to solve the ethanol issues, purchase land, and expand the Wheatfield by 8-10k seats or so. IMO that's far and away the most cost effective expansion we'll be able to manage, much cheaper than a new stadium from scratch elsewhere.

 

Would it be hoping too much for a 2 stage approach ? 

Stadium is always second but the first stage would be (years before) dealing with the tanks, land purchase from NBDC and possibly removing some of the bonded warehouses ?

[davemclaren]

34 minutes ago, Mysterion said:

 

Would it be hoping too much for a 2 stage approach ? 

Stadium is always second but the first stage would be (years before) dealing with the tanks, land purchase from NBDC and possibly removing some of the bonded warehouses ?

Only if NBD want to sell them and whether they want to sell them to us. Is there any indication that they do?

[A_A wehatethehibs]

 

 

9 hours ago, Led Tasso said:

 

I've done this all the way down to the details elsewhere in the thread, but yes, as I tried to allude, there are very good reasons you can't do the cantilever idea at Tynecastle, including structural and planning issues. The biggest problem is the ethanol safety issues at NBDC, and that we built the main stand to accommodate exactly how many seats we were allowed under COMAH restrictions.

 

I don't think the housing is an issue because there's a lot of space behind the Wheatfield and it's mostly distillery and old school that would fall in its shadow. We'd have to get some land from NBDC but it's just community pitch right now.

 

Long story short, my prediction is that in 10-15 years we'll spend £40-50m to solve the ethanol issues, purchase land, and expand the Wheatfield by 8-10k seats or so. IMO that's far and away the most cost effective expansion we'll be able to manage, much cheaper than a new stadium from scratch elsewhere.

 

I’d rather spend this non existent £40-50m on signing Ronaldo. Past his best but could do a job in the SPL 

[Mysterion]

1 minute ago, davemclaren said:

Only if NBD want to sell them and whether they want to sell them to us. Is there any indication that they do?

 

They've indicated some level of co-op is possible. 

What I would say is that NBDC's primary maturation site is no longer in Edinburgh and the distillery has modernised to push production levels higher over the years. 

 

Any Tynecastle development plan could be focussed around mutual support to benefit NBD. It could be beneficial to remove warehousing when we have to pay to move ethanol tanks (in order to increase production levels). Purely hypothetical stuff though. 

[Unknown user]

21 hours ago, davemclaren said:

The 30 year lifespan of the current stands is an urban myth. 

 

You've said this before but I know I didn't imagine the reported 25 year lifespan at the time, it worried me.

[A_A wehatethehibs]

4 minutes ago, Smithee said:

 

You've said this before but I know I didn't imagine the reported 25 year lifespan at the time, it worried me.

The Eiffel Tower only had a 20 year permit. Here we are 133 years later 
 

Assuming there’s no corrosion or damage to the structure, which will be inspected on a regular basis for its integrity and safety, the “lifespan” of those stands is, however long we want it to be. 

[Homme]

25/30 year is an estimated timescale before intervention is thought to be required to maintain the steelwork to as close to it's original condition as possible. eg prepping and repainting it again, addressing loss of section, corrosion, thinning or other steelwork related defects (if there are any!) It doesn't mean the stands need knocking down and building again after 25 years. 

 

The stands could last another 100 years with the correct maintenance.

 

 

 

 

 

[davemclaren]

56 minutes ago, Homme said:

25/30 year is an estimated timescale before intervention is thought to be required to maintain the steelwork to as close to it's original condition as possible. eg prepping and repainting it again, addressing loss of section, corrosion, thinning or other steelwork related defects (if there are any!) It doesn't mean the stands need knocking down and building again after 25 years. 

 

The stands could last another 100 years with the correct maintenance.

 

 

 

 

 

👍

[Watt-Zeefuik]

1 hour ago, A_A wehatethehibs said:

 

 

 

I’d rather spend this non existent £40-50m on signing Ronaldo. Past his best but could do a job in the SPL 

Can’t get a bank loan on half the cost of Ronaldo, can we?

 

Also while I take your point, Ronaldo?!?!

[Hungry hippo]

8 minutes ago, Led Tasso said:

Can’t get a bank loan on half the cost of Ronaldo, can we?

 

Also while I take your point, Ronaldo?!?!

 

We also won't get a bank loan these days to make a sizable dent into a £40 to £50m new stand project either.

[Sooks]

1 hour ago, Hungry hippo said:

 

We also won't get a bank loan these days to make a sizable dent into a £40 to £50m new stand project either.

 

We did manage to fund around half of that amount through the foundation and money from directors and benefactors though

[Watt-Zeefuik]

2 hours ago, Hungry hippo said:

 

We also won't get a bank loan these days to make a sizable dent into a £40 to £50m new stand project either.

 

1 hour ago, Sooks said:

 

We did manage to fund around half of that amount through the foundation and money from directors and benefactors though

 

I'd guess a bank would underwrite about £10m of it, which still leaves a lot but is what I'd call sizable. I'd also say a community notes investment scheme for fans to pay in with some basic interest paid back could work. (I helped start a co-op supermarket here that we funded in part that way.)

 

The point is, a new stand would earn increased revenue that will eventually pay for itself. Ronaldo, uh, won't.

[A_A wehatethehibs]

30 minutes ago, Led Tasso said:

 

 

I'd guess a bank would underwrite about £10m of it, which still leaves a lot but is what I'd call sizable. I'd also say a community notes investment scheme for fans to pay in with some basic interest paid back could work. (I helped start a co-op supermarket here that we funded in part that way.)

 

The point is, a new stand would earn increased revenue that will eventually pay for itself. Ronaldo, uh, won't.

It would pay for itself IF we increase our average attendance to 25,000+
 

Of course if our average attendence was to hover around the 17k on a good season mark, or drop to 15k as it does after any poor/ average seasons, IE where it’s been for the last 30 years or so, leveraging ourselves up to the eyeballs in a time of rising interest rates could well bankrupt us. 
 

But the delusional folk who think this fantasy project is viable in any way, don’t like to take the worst case scenario into consideration. To you it’s a guarantee we’d sell 20k season tickets season 1 and average 25k. A 30% jump in demand is going to happen just because we’ve built a new stand.
 

To be clear, the first thing that would happen if average attendances didn’t reach your vague estimated level within a season or 2, and we didn’t see the huge 30% jump in revenue you’re expecting which we need to service the debt, club would first have to cut costs to service the debt, which would then make our football team worse, which would make our attendances worse than what they are now, and we’d soon be facing a second bankruptcy. And this time we would definitely lose Tynecastle because it would be collateral on the debt. 
 

And also ok you’re borrowing your £10m but  actually you’ve got to find your other £40m in full first. The bank wont lend you the £10m until you’ve secured the full entire funding for the project and guarantee it’s completion. 
 

As I say we should spend this non existent £40m on Ronaldo. He’d score 50’goals and win us the league, get champions league group stage, then we’ll have enough money to build the stand. Not to mention our followers on the ‘gram would be through the roof. 

 

[Watt-Zeefuik]

13 minutes ago, A_A wehatethehibs said:

It would pay for itself IF we increase our average attendance to 25,000+
 

Of course if our average attendence was to hover around the 17k on a good season mark, or drop to 15k as it does after any poor/ average seasons, IE where it’s been for the last 30 years or so, leveraging ourselves up to the eyeballs in a time of rising interest rates could well bankrupt us. 
 

But the delusional folk who think this fantasy project is viable in any way, don’t like to take the worst case scenario into consideration. To you it’s a guarantee we’d sell 20k season tickets season 1 and average 25k. A 30% jump in demand is going to happen just because we’ve built a new stand.
 

To be clear, the first thing that would happen if average attendances didn’t reach your vague estimated level within a season or 2, and we didn’t see the huge 30% jump in revenue you’re expecting which we need to service the debt, club would first have to cut costs to service the debt, which would then make our football team worse, which would make our attendances worse than what they are now, and we’d soon be facing a second bankruptcy. And this time we would definitely lose Tynecastle because it would be collateral on the debt. 
 

And also ok you’re borrowing your £10m but  actually you’ve got to find your other £40m in full first. The bank wont lend you the £10m until you’ve secured the full entire funding for the project and guarantee it’s completion. 
 

As I say we should spend this non existent £40m on Ronaldo. He’d score 50’goals and win us the league, get champions league group stage, then we’ll have enough money to build the stand. Not to mention our followers on the ‘gram would be through the roof. 

 

 

I'm a former system administrator, never challenge me on thinking up worst case scenarios.

 

I've repeatedly said on this thread for months but also in the past day or so that I think we're 10+ years away from this and have no business doing it any time soon, with the assumption that we only do it if we continue to progress in Europe and in finances over that time, which builds up both cash reserves and demand. If that doesn't happen, we don't build, okay?

 

Now, let's get into the rest. There's this pervasive notion that our support has been static and returns to a fixed level if we go off the boil. This is absolutely false. Our average attendances have been below 15k exactly once since 2005 (excluding COVID restrictions which dampened last year as well), and that was ironically during Sergio's season. Even during the Championship season we were above 17k, and it's hard for numbers to rise above that currently because midweek league games and less attractive cup ties are always well below capacity, and we can't go much above about 19k right now with segregation. Those levels are well above our average attendances in the 1990s, when we had generally much more successful teams. We now attract more fans in bad years than we used to in excellent years. Our support continues to grow with no signs of slowing down.

 

Now let's assume we may not make group stages every year for a decade, but that we make the UECL group stages 5 times and the UEL group stages 2-3 times. If we bank £1m every time that happens, that's the start of a reserve fund. Let's also say we grow to become decent at European competitions and get knockout stages a few times in there too. That's many more millions coming our way, of which we can bank some.

 

If all this is happening, I guarantee our ticket demand at Tynecastle starts boiling over. Now we're regularly leaving revenue on the table and the board start seriously contemplating Murrayfield again, at least for European fixtures.

 

So we've got £10-15m banked from European success.

Add another £5-10m from a 500 or 1000 club offering.

£5m from a community note offering.

£10m from large net worth loans such as Ms. Budge and Mr. Anderson.

£10m from a bank, to underwrite the purchase of land, with the additional security of the land under the existing Wheatfield.

 

£40-50m sorted.

 

But aye, much better to spend that on a washed-up star who will loaf around the pitch and roll his eyes at the players around him. Sound, even as a joke.

[Korky]

Unfortunately, after we’d expanded the stadium and potentially grown attendances we’d still be in the parochial backwater of the Scottish league.

Do thousands of extra people really want to watch us play the likes of Ross County, St Mirren etc.?

 

[sac]

New screens will stop those corners being filled in😉

[Bazzas right boot]

I want a roof. 

We can all then shout 

"the roof,  the roof,  the roof is on fire" 

Even if it's not. 

 

It would be quality. 

[Bazzas right boot]

15 minutes ago, Korky said:

Unfortunately, after we’d expanded the stadium and potentially grown attendances we’d still be in the parochial backwater of the Scottish league.

Do thousands of extra people really want to watch us play the likes of Ross County, St Mirren etc.?

 

 

Aye,  they do. 

 

[Bazzas right boot]

23 minutes ago, Led Tasso said:

 

I'm a former system administrator, never challenge me on thinking up worst case scenarios.

 

I've repeatedly said on this thread for months but also in the past day or so that I think we're 10+ years away from this and have no business doing it any time soon, with the assumption that we only do it if we continue to progress in Europe and in finances over that time, which builds up both cash reserves and demand. If that doesn't happen, we don't build, okay?

 

Now, let's get into the rest. There's this pervasive notion that our support has been static and returns to a fixed level if we go off the boil. This is absolutely false. Our average attendances have been below 15k exactly once since 2005 (excluding COVID restrictions which dampened last year as well), and that was ironically during Sergio's season. Even during the Championship season we were above 17k, and it's hard for numbers to rise above that currently because midweek league games and less attractive cup ties are always well below capacity, and we can't go much above about 19k right now with segregation. Those levels are well above our average attendances in the 1990s, when we had generally much more successful teams. We now attract more fans in bad years than we used to in excellent years. Our support continues to grow with no signs of slowing down.

 

Now let's assume we may not make group stages every year for a decade, but that we make the UECL group stages 5 times and the UEL group stages 2-3 times. If we bank £1m every time that happens, that's the start of a reserve fund. Let's also say we grow to become decent at European competitions and get knockout stages a few times in there too. That's many more millions coming our way, of which we can bank some.

 

If all this is happening, I guarantee our ticket demand at Tynecastle starts boiling over. Now we're regularly leaving revenue on the table and the board start seriously contemplating Murrayfield again, at least for European fixtures.

 

So we've got £10-15m banked from European success.

Add another £5-10m from a 500 or 1000 club offering.

£5m from a community note offering.

£10m from large net worth loans such as Ms. Budge and Mr. Anderson.

£10m from a bank, to underwrite the purchase of land, with the additional security of the land under the existing Wheatfield.

 

£40-50m sorted.

 

But aye, much better to spend that on a washed-up star who will loaf around the pitch and roll his eyes at the players around him. Sound, even as a joke.

 

 

Tbf,  if we ever have £40-£50m to spend we should put it all into the playing staff and take a tilt at the title. 

 

Get that and we're in the ucl. 

 

 

[stirlo]

13 minutes ago, Led Tasso said:

 

I'm a former system administrator, never challenge me on thinking up worst case scenarios.

 

I've repeatedly said on this thread for months but also in the past day or so that I think we're 10+ years away from this and have no business doing it any time soon, with the assumption that we only do it if we continue to progress in Europe and in finances over that time, which builds up both cash reserves and demand. If that doesn't happen, we don't build, okay?

 

Now, let's get into the rest. There's this pervasive notion that our support has been static and returns to a fixed level if we go off the boil. This is absolutely false. Our average attendances have been below 15k exactly once since 2005 (excluding COVID restrictions which dampened last year as well), and that was ironically during Sergio's season. Even during the Championship season we were above 17k, and it's hard for numbers to rise above that currently because midweek league games and less attractive cup ties are always well below capacity, and we can't go much above about 19k right now with segregation. Those levels are well above our average attendances in the 1990s, when we had generally much more successful teams. We now attract more fans in bad years than we used to in excellent years. Our support continues to grow with no signs of slowing down.

 

Now let's assume we may not make group stages every year for a decade, but that we make the UECL group stages 5 times and the UEL group stages 2-3 times. If we bank £1m every time that happens, that's the start of a reserve fund. Let's also say we grow to become decent at European competitions and get knockout stages a few times in there too. That's many more millions coming our way, of which we can bank some.

 

If all this is happening, I guarantee our ticket demand at Tynecastle starts boiling over. Now we're regularly leaving revenue on the table and the board start seriously contemplating Murrayfield again, at least for European fixtures.

 

So we've got £10-15m banked from European success.

Add another £5-10m from a 500 or 1000 club offering.

£5m from a community note offering.

£10m from large net worth loans such as Ms. Budge and Mr. Anderson.

£10m from a bank, to underwrite the purchase of land, with the additional security of the land under the existing Wheatfield.

 

£40-50m sorted.

 

But aye, much better to spend that on a washed-up star who will loaf around the pitch and roll his eyes at the players around him. Sound, even as a joke.

 

Excellent post, especially the bit in bold. It amazes me how many Hearts fans perpetuate this myth that the minute our results go off the boil, thousands stop turning up for matches. These are probably the same folk who a decade ago were saying many members of the foundation will stop their contributions after a couple of years. In fact, the possibility of having 10,000 members in the foreseeable future is not a ridiculous one.

 

It seems to me that the sensible thing for the club to do at this stage would be (i) to think about purchasing surrounding land and (ii) in consultation with the foundation to start building a fund for stadium development further down the line.

 

Something along the lines of the 500 club suggestion is also a good one.

 

Believe me, I never ever want to see the club get in a position where the solvency of the club is at risk, but done in a sensible, costed way, planning for future stadium expansion doesn't need to entail taking on dangerous amounts of debt.

[A_A wehatethehibs]

2 minutes ago, Bazzas right boot said:

 

 

Tbf,  if we ever have £40-£50m to spend we should put it all into the playing staff and take a tilt at the title. 

 

Get that and we're in the ucl. 

 

 

 

Yeah, why stop there as well, if it’s possible to raise this £50m from nothing why can’t we raise £100m? Then we can have Messi and Ronaldo ok yes both over the hill but do a job in the SPL 

[Bazzas right boot]

Just now, A_A wehatethehibs said:

 

Yeah, why stop there as well, if it’s possible to raise this £50m from nothing why can’t we raise £100m? Then we can have Messi and Ronaldo ok yes both over the hill but do a job in the SPL 

 

 

I'd be gutted if we were 3rd consistently then spent £40m on a project. 

 

 

 

[Watt-Zeefuik]

16 minutes ago, Korky said:

Unfortunately, after we’d expanded the stadium and potentially grown attendances we’d still be in the parochial backwater of the Scottish league.

Do thousands of extra people really want to watch us play the likes of Ross County, St Mirren etc.?

 

 

It's become so normal that folk no longer find it odd that tens of thousands show up to watch teams from places like Wolverhampton, Blackpool, or Watford, and that those teams have more money than those from Frankfurt, Marseille, Oslo, or Vienna. But ultimately that's also a very strange state of affairs.

 

For that matter, it's equally odd that the standard of football on display in Dingwall is roughly equal to what these folks are paying an average of $48 to see.

 

Football is a strange beast indeed.