• Welcome to the ShrimperZone forums.
    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which only gives you limited access.

    Existing Users:.
    Please log-in using your existing username and password. If you have any problems, please see below.

    New Users:
    Join our free community now and gain access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and free. Click here to join.

    Fans from other clubs
    We welcome and appreciate supporters from other clubs who wish to engage in sensible discussion. Please feel free to join as above but understand that this is a moderated site and those who cannot play nicely will be quickly removed.

    Assistance Required
    For help with the registration process or accessing your account, please send a note using the Contact us link in the footer, please include your account name. We can then provide you with a new password and verification to get you on the site.

SUFC: The Future The regeneration of Roots Hall

Forums New posts
rigsby said:
The West and the North will be done first. Capacity and facilities have to be greatly improved in those two before knocking down the East. That will having a baring on anyones decision to switch once the East is completed.
Click to expand...
Exactly this ^^^ @rigsby.
I think it's unfortunate that quite a few people haven't listened over the last several months to what the consortium have actually said.

They want to improve the monetary return in the West which they see as a win-win with limited changes.
The South is really only thought of as a clean up & added options, or was that onions, to create more revenue.
After that North will be adapted to add extra capacity but as yet those changes are still under review.
Only after that lot will East be demolished & rebuilt with the add-on facilities bridging out towards the car park that we need for the 52 week a year income stream. That work I believe won't happen until the funds start to flow in from FF.
All the people saying we need an immediate return to the North & everything else doesn't matter really don't really understand how the club survives.
 
Hooly said:
Exactly this ^^^ @rigsby.
I think it's unfortunate that quite a few people haven't listened over the last several months to what the consortium have actually said.

They want to improve the monetary return in the West which they see as a win-win with limited changes.
The South is really only thought of as a clean up & added options, or was that onions, to create more revenue.
After that North will be adapted to add extra capacity but as yet those changes are still under review.
Only after that lot will East be demolished & rebuilt with the add-on facilities bridging out towards the car park that we need for the 52 week a year income stream. That work I believe won't happen until the funds start to flow in from FF.
All the people saying we need an immediate return to the North & everything else doesn't matter really don't really understand how the club survives.
Click to expand...
Pete, an element of our fan base not listening to facts and reality? Surely not 😉🤣
 
Sherif H said:
I know some of it is in jest, but let's please stop with the rotating of the pitch chat...

In theory the space is there, but it turns a £10-15m 'relatively' soft touch phased redevelopment in to a £60m project which would ensure we had to move away for at least one season.
Click to expand...
Nonsense
 
CanveyCastle said:
and what qualifications and experience do you have for such an informative answer ?
Click to expand...
It wasn't meant to be an informative answer, clearly. Other than to state that their IS an alternative position that challenges the $60m price tag and having to leave Roots Hall for a year. An opinion is just that, it's a subjective thing. It's not information. But the alternative position can be argued. I'm quite happy to do that. But I don't want to take over this thread.

Qualifications and experience won't matter once the for/against cases are presented. Only the weight of the argument matters then.
 
BluBayou said:
It wasn't meant to be an informative answer, clearly. Other than to state that their IS an alternative position that challenges the $60m price tag and having to leave Roots Hall for a year. An opinion is just that, it's a subjective thing. It's not information. But the alternative position can be argued. I'm quite happy to do that. But I don't want to take over this thread.

Qualifications and experience won't matter once the for/against cases are presented. Only the weight of the argument matters then.
Click to expand...

Agreed it’s all about opinions

It’s just that @Sherif H builds stadiums for a living. Household-name stadiums at that.

His opinion on stadium building isn’t the same as most.
 
Hooly said:
Me too!! I think I know who knows more about stadium construction.
Click to expand...
If the added revenue is going to come from facilities extending out from the back of a new main stand then that kills the pitch rotation !. My thinking was based on the footprint of a traditional stand.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

.



Club News
Fixtures and Results
League Table
SUFC Ticket Stats
Shrimpers Trust
SoccerBase
SUEPA (Ex Players)
Shrimperzone on Facebook
Shrimperzone on Twitter
Shrimperzone on Instagram


ShrimperZone Sponsors

FFM MSPFX Foreign Exchange Services
Estuary MFF2
Zone Advertisers Zone Advertisers

ShrimperZone - SUFC Player Sponsorship

Southend United Away Travel


All At Sea Fanzine


Back
Top