Bradford Bulls would throw open door to city neighbours (From Bradford Telegraph and Argus)

far from ideal but if it helps us survive and enables us to put more money into the team then it makes sense.
.
i'm sure this will be met with negativity by the vast majority of city fans but what are the other option? continue to struggle at Valley Parade and have lack of funds out on the pitch?
.
will at least me a few mile on my journey, will save me having to drive through the eye sore of a city centre.
.
What would happen with the terracing??? Would this be allowed? The only negative is that it would probably be as cold as the Don Valley.

No doubt the visiting supporters will have the best viewing position if we move there. How will they segregate fans?

hahahahaha

Blue touch paper lit, can't wait to read some of the comments to follow !!

It wasn't long since that there was talk that the Bulls might have to move to Valley Parade or risk losing their Super League franchise - So why not the Bulls move to Valley Parade and share the rent, which is far better in every respect?
Its no wonder that Hood would welcome a deal with BCFC, it likely secures the long term future of Odsal, which is only just about fit for purpose as it stands!

If the council had it's eye on the ball, which it never does they could do so much for both clubs and the future of the City centre.
.
Firstly they could sell off Odsal and use the funds to start a project to build a multi purpose stadium in the City center where Westfield is supposed to be. Something on the lines of what Wigan, Hull and Huddersfield have.
.
Just imagine the benefits of such a project. Over 10,000 people every week coming into the city centre.
.
If £24m can be wasted on a park, millions more planned to move the courts, and sale proceeds from Odsal a large part of funding would have been put down.
.
Think of it, there would be train stations at either end, Market street would regenerate over night, a 8 floor car park just a walk away.
.
It really isn't rocket science and with the money wasted by the council a project like this would look much better value.
.
It's too late now I fear.

I understand it would need £5 Million, to buy back the Stadium, at Valley Parade.
*
If that amount could be obtained/raised?; then it would go a very long way to solving a good percentage of the present problems, in financing, and operating, the Club today.
*
COULD THE GENUINE SUPPORTERS OF BCFC START A CAMPAIGN TO GET THAT £5 MILLION??????.
*
It would have to be one tremendous effort, to save the Club.

Thee Voice of Reason wrote:
If the council had it's eye on the ball, which it never does they could do so much for both clubs and the future of the City centre. . Firstly they could sell off Odsal and use the funds to start a project to build a multi purpose stadium in the City center where Westfield is supposed to be. Something on the lines of what Wigan, Hull and Huddersfield have. . Just imagine the benefits of such a project. Over 10,000 people every week coming into the city centre. . If £24m can be wasted on a park, millions more planned to move the courts, and sale proceeds from Odsal a large part of funding would have been put down. . Think of it, there would be train stations at either end, Market street would regenerate over night, a 8 floor car park just a walk away. . It really isn't rocket science and with the money wasted by the council a project like this would look much better value. . It's too late now I fear.

Great idea,unfortunately Bradford Council have no vision.I've been campaigning for years about the refurbishment of the Odeon building,having met Council Leader Greenwood,he said the idea wouldn't fly lol,i mentioned the extra footfall and money concert and conferance goers would bring into the City centre and he glazed over.Obviously unless the word demolition is mentioned or hole excavation is implyed in any plans Bradford Council aren't interested.CTID

The problem with moving to the city centre is that a sports ground takes up much more area that just the pitch and the “hole” isn’t that big. Yes there are train stations but I know of nobody who goes to a rugby match by train other that TV people. There is absolutely no car parking in the surrounding areas. 10,000 rugby people going into the city on a Sunday afternoon is pointless as they won’t spend and if they did we want it spent in the stadium. 10,000 football supporters going into the city centre on a Saturday will drive shoppers away. On the face of it Voice of reason it sounds great, but when you think of it in detail city centres are for family shopping and sports grounds should be out of the way near motorways or main arterial routes. If City and Bulls joined it must be a case of re-building one stadium for both supporters. I still think out of town is best whether it is at or near the M606. I am not a City viewer but I assume they must be sick and tired of paying this bloke all that money when they desperately need money to spend on players. Someone needs to make a decision on how both clubs are going to survive in the long term – and this may mean we all swallow some of our pride to make it happen.

Prycey wrote:
The problem with moving to the city centre is that a sports ground takes up much more area that just the pitch and the “hole” isn’t that big. Yes there are train stations but I know of nobody who goes to a rugby match by train other that TV people. There is absolutely no car parking in the surrounding areas. 10,000 rugby people going into the city on a Sunday afternoon is pointless as they won’t spend and if they did we want it spent in the stadium. 10,000 football supporters going into the city centre on a Saturday will drive shoppers away. On the face of it Voice of reason it sounds great, but when you think of it in detail city centres are for family shopping and sports grounds should be out of the way near motorways or main arterial routes. If City and Bulls joined it must be a case of re-building one stadium for both supporters. I still think out of town is best whether it is at or near the M606. I am not a City viewer but I assume they must be sick and tired of paying this bloke all that money when they desperately need money to spend on players. Someone needs to make a decision on how both clubs are going to survive in the long term – and this may mean we all swallow some of our pride to make it happen.

I fully understand there would be various things to look into.
.
Re the train, people don't get the train because there is no station near either ground. I'll tell you now hundreds would get the train from the Keighley/Shipley side if it stopped just outside the ground.
.
It's just throwing an idea out there, research could prove it a bad idea, or a good idea but you can't say it will drive shoppers out of Bradford when there is no shops there to visit as it stands.

Odsal is the prime location for a combined club, the facilities at present are not great however things can be done quite quickly to improve standards.

Blackpool managed a new stand in about 12 weeks from start to finish on gaining promotion and the same can be done at Odsal. It depends on whether the council need to keep the running track area for future events or things can be realigned.

New semi permanent roofs can be placed over the North Stand area behind the sticks. I would imagine for an investment of around £1m the venue could provide the spring board for future development.

What the council need to realise is that the grandiose plans to fill in the bowl (settlement is a massive issue) is needless and not practical when they have the basics for a great facility. Sharing facilities is the way forward, it creates a space that is used year round and is an asset to the local community. Wigan and my club Hull City have shown that its the way to go. If the development brings in some education facilities and some well being facilities there will be funding streams open to the council to assist in costs. Unfortunately however the council seem to be hell bent on only dealing with applications that involve demolition and big holes. Maybe the planners and council leaders have a fetish for heavy plant.

When the Low Moor station is eventually built i'm sure that would be a popular way of getting to any proposed City Centre Stadium.Why on earth would ten thousand football fans drive shoppers away lol.I'm sure Newcastle shoppers are just fine having to share their City Centre with NUFC fans.I simply don't agree about supporters of either club not using City centre facilities either,BCFC fans for sure use them and there are no reasons why Bulls fans wouldn't use them either.CTID

Prycey wrote:
The problem with moving to the city centre is that a sports ground takes up much more area that just the pitch and the “hole” isn’t that big. Yes there are train stations but I know of nobody who goes to a rugby match by train other that TV people. There is absolutely no car parking in the surrounding areas. 10,000 rugby people going into the city on a Sunday afternoon is pointless as they won’t spend and if they did we want it spent in the stadium. 10,000 football supporters going into the city centre on a Saturday will drive shoppers away. On the face of it Voice of reason it sounds great, but when you think of it in detail city centres are for family shopping and sports grounds should be out of the way near motorways or main arterial routes. If City and Bulls joined it must be a case of re-building one stadium for both supporters. I still think out of town is best whether it is at or near the M606. I am not a City viewer but I assume they must be sick and tired of paying this bloke all that money when they desperately need money to spend on players. Someone needs to make a decision on how both clubs are going to survive in the long term – and this may mean we all swallow some of our pride to make it happen.

Personally i don't think there is any pride to be swallowed. Both sets of fans want what is best for their respective club and if moving to Odsal means we save £700kish per annum then i'm more then happy with that. If we move to Odsal then the Bulls will get to save a percentage on thier rent. Yes it would be hard to leave our home but if that's what is needed then sobeit.
.
As for the comments on Bradford Council then I couldn't agree more. I live in halifax now and everytime I visit Bradford whether it be a meeting, visiting family or a night out it gets worse. Which other council would knock half of the town centre down before realising they cant afford to re-build???? Shocking. Halifax is very small in comparison but the fact it has much more to offer then Bradford is disgraceful.

Take note mr hood! this is the result of cheap season tickets. You get the fans but can't afford to pay the bills.

Question is would you rather line someone's pocket with 1.25 million a year for another 20 years or invest in a ground that can be developed at a shared cost that isn't going to benefit anyone except the clubs we support? Bottom line it doesn't just suit the bulls it benefits city in the long term too. They spend half of the rent on helping develop odsal with the bulls and they save 500k+ a year! How is that bad?

franklyn wrote:
Take note mr hood! this is the result of cheap season tickets. You get the fans but can't afford to pay the bills.

Sorry to disagree with you yet again Franklyn but Cheap tickets means more fans, better atmosphere and a chance to sell more beer, sandwiches, shop sales and lottery, plus people take friends who pay full price and may transfer to stand at £5 a pop. Then theres the enterprise which attracts new fans,
.
Expensive tickets mean less fans for an income similar to cheaper tickets full stop. So how can it possibly affect the ability to pay the rent.

Freddy wrote:
I understand it would need £5 Million, to buy back the Stadium, at Valley Parade.
*
If that amount could be obtained/raised?; then it would go a very long way to solving a good percentage of the present problems, in financing, and operating, the Club today.
*
COULD THE GENUINE SUPPORTERS OF BCFC START A CAMPAIGN TO GET THAT £5 MILLION??????.
*
It would have to be one tremendous effort, to save the Club.

SOMETHING WE SHOULD HAVE DONE YEARS AGO!!
Still dont know how on earth we get out of the lease though???
CHEERS ....MR RHODES!!!

People think about it a little. If we didn't have cheap season tickets we would only get 4000 fans so the income would be pretty much the same unless you are all prepared to pay 500 or 600 pounds each.

If city moved to odsal. Not only woulf they save £750K per year.
They would save on admin staff. ticket office and admin staff could be combined for the 2 clubs, hospitality staff, catering, security, etc could all be combined meaning money would be saved on wages etc.
.
Between the 2 clubs they could own the ground and get a bank loan for 1-2 million to put a roof over the tunnel and rooley lane end, convert the old touchdown into better corparate digs.
.
The terracing could be re-laid and then the stadium would look a whole lot different. Moving to Odsal is a very worthwhile excersie and would save City a fortune. between them and the bulls they would have there own stadium with little or no rent costs.
.
The Coral stand is great for football or rugby.
.
Come on City & Bulls... get your heads together and move up there and sort out the stadium where you can both be happy and enjoy playing.

Why can't we build a new 25,000 stadium for both teams to share. It's the only viable solution. City fans don't want to come to Odsal & I don't want to watch the Bulls at VP cos either team will lose their identity so lets share a new stadium fit for both sides to play in. Forget about past history. lets get Bradford Sport back on the map. 10 years ago City were in the Premiership and Bulls were the biggest RL Club in the WORLD now look at both Clubs !

macca1969 wrote:
People think about it a little. If we didn't have cheap season tickets we would only get 4000 fans so the income would be pretty much the same unless you are all prepared to pay 500 or 600 pounds each.

I fail to understand how, if the cost of a season ticket was raised to say £230 ie £10 a game, this would mean 6000 supporters would say to themselves, "Too much, that's it I'm off!" We'd be talking about maybe just another £80-£100, surely. If that's the difference between people staying/stopping being a Bradford City supporter then...maybe the city doesn't deserve a football team to support and maybe those 6000 aren't really 'fans' at all!! I know times are hard, but whatever happened to 'saving up' all season to buy the ticket. I wonder how much these 6000 spend on other liesure 'pursuits'?!! My advice to any fan would be, stop going to away games-you'll save a packet that doesn't help City at all!
Compare even £250 with the cost of a season ticket at Huddersfield/Leeds-t
here is no comparison! Just where can you see live entertainment for less than £10-nowhere unless it's pretty 'homespun'!! The truth is the 'cut-price' offers have gone on too long and now people see £150 as (not a discount anymore) but the true value of a season ticket at City ie they're taken for 'granted.' THIS is one of the reasons we are now in the present mess!

PS: If 10,000 fans stayed as season ticket holders paying £250 a year (extra £100), this would bring in an extra
10,000x 100 =£1 million !!
This would cover the rent, without any money now in the City 'coffers' being used at all! Perhaps we wouldn't even be having this discussion!!

Cityman23 wrote:
PS: If 10,000 fans stayed as season ticket holders paying £250 a year (extra £100), this would bring in an extra 10,000x 100 =£1 million !! This would cover the rent, without any money now in the City 'coffers' being used at all! Perhaps we wouldn't even be having this discussion!!

Because money doesn't grow on trees and many can't afford another £100 per year because at those figures you include children too who as it stands are free or very cheap.

All this points out is Jacko was not just trying to get is out of the f ing mess Taylor got us in but has had to battle with much more.
.
Your doing a cracking job Jacko and I am surprised you still want the job.
.
Good luck tonight.
.
ps lets just do what is best fot the clubs future in terms on staying or moving from VP.....but I also echo Shaun, getting out of a lease is not as easy as saying, see ya, we are going....The whole thing sounds very very very messy and worrying, Gibb is entitled to hang on to every single penny of the 25 year agreement, but if he tries we get wound up....we have no club he has no tenants for his football ground!!! so he aint fully in control

Thee Voice of Reason wrote:

Cityman23 wrote: PS: If 10,000 fans stayed as season ticket holders paying £250 a year (extra £100), this would bring in an extra 10,000x 100 =£1 million !! This would cover the rent, without any money now in the City 'coffers' being used at all! Perhaps we wouldn't even be having this discussion!!

Because money doesn't grow on trees and many can't afford another £100 per year because at those figures you include children too who as it stands are free or very cheap.

To 'Thee Voice Of Reason'
The truth is what I've already stated that many fans now see the current £150 not as a discount offer but as the 'true' value of a ticket and that's why we have problems (in increasing it).
So it means then that (following your reasoning) many want to follow a professional football team (and they can't follow any others I know in the West Yorks. area at that price) at an unrealistically low price.
ie one where costs can't be met/players are poor (because that's all we can get) we never can expect promotion and go down/down and finally out of existence altogether.
What I often wonder, when I attend 'VP' with my vacuum flask/banana/biscuit is where do all the people I see get their money from to afford drinks/burgers/frank
furters/pies/having a bet/replica shirt etc. There seem plenty of those kind of fans around. And I wonder how many of the 6000 really are in financial difficulties. Some will be but perhaps they could be given a discount if they proved they were unemployed/on benefits etc. Isn't that a realistic way of dealing with that problem?

City will never move to Odsal. Your football club is a joke, just look at what your still paying the players! that's partly why your in the current mess. I for one would not want to see City it Odsal would much rather Bradford Park came to Join us. Sorry that's the truth your all pie in the sky men living in the past, now without a pot to **** in.

Cityman23 wrote:

Thee Voice of Reason wrote:

Cityman23 wrote: PS: If 10,000 fans stayed as season ticket holders paying £250 a year (extra £100), this would bring in an extra 10,000x 100 =£1 million !! This would cover the rent, without any money now in the City 'coffers' being used at all! Perhaps we wouldn't even be having this discussion!!

Because money doesn't grow on trees and many can't afford another £100 per year because at those figures you include children too who as it stands are free or very cheap.

To 'Thee Voice Of Reason' The truth is what I've already stated that many fans now see the current £150 not as a discount offer but as the 'true' value of a ticket and that's why we have problems (in increasing it). So it means then that (following your reasoning) many want to follow a professional football team (and they can't follow any others I know in the West Yorks. area at that price) at an unrealistically low price. ie one where costs can't be met/players are poor (because that's all we can get) we never can expect promotion and go down/down and finally out of existence altogether. What I often wonder, when I attend 'VP' with my vacuum flask/banana/biscuit is where do all the people I see get their money from to afford drinks/burgers/frank furters/pies/having a bet/replica shirt etc. There seem plenty of those kind of fans around. And I wonder how many of the 6000 really are in financial difficulties. Some will be but perhaps they could be given a discount if they proved they were unemployed/on benefits etc. Isn't that a realistic way of dealing with that problem?

Your living in a dream world.
.
All these stupid calculations 10,000 x £100 simples. But it's not.
.
We get 10,000 but how many aren't paying adult prices? I bet at least 30-40% of all people who attend city are either free children under 11, discounted tickets at 12-16 or people over 65.
.
A dad takes his 2 kids, 1 adult ticket, 2 child tickets or freebies dependant on age.
.
So 10,000 x £100 doesn't work it's not realisitic.
.
Put everyones ticket up by £100 and this dad has to pay £300 more for the status quo.
.
As for discounts for unemployed. If your unemployed you should focus your resourses elsewhere not on attending football games.

MECCA BINGO wrote:
City will never move to Odsal. Your football club is a joke, just look at what your still paying the players! that's partly why your in the current mess. I for one would not want to see City it Odsal would much rather Bradford Park came to Join us. Sorry that's the truth your all pie in the sky men living in the past, now without a pot to **** in.

mecca bingo.....just read your comments............
.....as far as pie in the sky !!! the bulls are not exactly setting the super league alight are they? and they too have done the cheaper season tickets. With or without a pot to p-ss in as you say....city will and always have been better supported than the bulls and their ground and facilities are far superior than at wind blown/ scruffy odsal tip..........and as far as living in the past.....people who live in glass houses come to mind......bully bully!!!

Thee Voice of Reason wrote:

Cityman23 wrote:

Thee Voice of Reason wrote:

Cityman23 wrote: PS: If 10,000 fans stayed as season ticket holders paying £250 a year (extra £100), this would bring in an extra 10,000x 100 =£1 million !! This would cover the rent, without any money now in the City 'coffers' being used at all! Perhaps we wouldn't even be having this discussion!!

Because money doesn't grow on trees and many can't afford another £100 per year because at those figures you include children too who as it stands are free or very cheap.

To 'Thee Voice Of Reason' The truth is what I've already stated that many fans now see the current £150 not as a discount offer but as the 'true' value of a ticket and that's why we have problems (in increasing it). So it means then that (following your reasoning) many want to follow a professional football team (and they can't follow any others I know in the West Yorks. area at that price) at an unrealistically low price. ie one where costs can't be met/players are poor (because that's all we can get) we never can expect promotion and go down/down and finally out of existence altogether. What I often wonder, when I attend 'VP' with my vacuum flask/banana/biscuit is where do all the people I see get their money from to afford drinks/burgers/frank furters/pies/having a bet/replica shirt etc. There seem plenty of those kind of fans around. And I wonder how many of the 6000 really are in financial difficulties. Some will be but perhaps they could be given a discount if they proved they were unemployed/on benefits etc. Isn't that a realistic way of dealing with that problem?

Your living in a dream world. . All these stupid calculations 10,000 x £100 simples. But it's not. . We get 10,000 but how many aren't paying adult prices? I bet at least 30-40% of all people who attend city are either free children under 11, discounted tickets at 12-16 or people over 65. . A dad takes his 2 kids, 1 adult ticket, 2 child tickets or freebies dependant on age. . So 10,000 x £100 doesn't work it's not realisitic. . Put everyones ticket up by £100 and this dad has to pay £300 more for the status quo. . As for discounts for unemployed. If your unemployed you should focus your resourses elsewhere not on attending football games.

So 'Thee Voice Of Reason' you genuinely believe every one of those 6000 fans (above the 4000 who would continue) needs the benefit of the £150 cheap season ticket (to make them stay as season ticket holders) and should get it 'season on season'? I think it is NOT me who is living in a dream world?
City by giving EVERYBODY the benefit of that cheap season ticket is giving everybody (regardlless of whether they can afford to pay more or not) the equivalent of a 'Universal Benefit'. What I think would make more sense is to make it a 'Means-tested' 'benefit'/discount. ie if people can prove money is tight ie unwaged/benefits/pen
sioners etc it SHOULD be cheaper. But NOT for everyone ie those who can afford to spend freely on the sort of merchandise/refreshm
ents sold expensively at 'VP.' I don't call that unreasonable -I call that FAIR!
Oh and by the way, I would issue with you about the fact the unemployed are not entitled to a pleasure/liesure activity once in a while (after all they've gor five days to go down to the JobCentre Plus/scour the papers for work!! Don't be so 'judgemental'!!

Cityman23 wrote:

Thee Voice of Reason wrote:

Cityman23 wrote:

Thee Voice of Reason wrote:

Cityman23 wrote: PS: If 10,000 fans stayed as season ticket holders paying £250 a year (extra £100), this would bring in an extra 10,000x 100 =£1 million !! This would cover the rent, without any money now in the City 'coffers' being used at all! Perhaps we wouldn't even be having this discussion!!

Because money doesn't grow on trees and many can't afford another £100 per year because at those figures you include children too who as it stands are free or very cheap.

To 'Thee Voice Of Reason' The truth is what I've already stated that many fans now see the current £150 not as a discount offer but as the 'true' value of a ticket and that's why we have problems (in increasing it). So it means then that (following your reasoning) many want to follow a professional football team (and they can't follow any others I know in the West Yorks. area at that price) at an unrealistically low price. ie one where costs can't be met/players are poor (because that's all we can get) we never can expect promotion and go down/down and finally out of existence altogether. What I often wonder, when I attend 'VP' with my vacuum flask/banana/biscuit is where do all the people I see get their money from to afford drinks/burgers/frank furters/pies/having a bet/replica shirt etc. There seem plenty of those kind of fans around. And I wonder how many of the 6000 really are in financial difficulties. Some will be but perhaps they could be given a discount if they proved they were unemployed/on benefits etc. Isn't that a realistic way of dealing with that problem?

Your living in a dream world. . All these stupid calculations 10,000 x £100 simples. But it's not. . We get 10,000 but how many aren't paying adult prices? I bet at least 30-40% of all people who attend city are either free children under 11, discounted tickets at 12-16 or people over 65. . A dad takes his 2 kids, 1 adult ticket, 2 child tickets or freebies dependant on age. . So 10,000 x £100 doesn't work it's not realisitic. . Put everyones ticket up by £100 and this dad has to pay £300 more for the status quo. . As for discounts for unemployed. If your unemployed you should focus your resourses elsewhere not on attending football games.

So 'Thee Voice Of Reason' you genuinely believe every one of those 6000 fans (above the 4000 who would continue) needs the benefit of the £150 cheap season ticket (to make them stay as season ticket holders) and should get it 'season on season'? I think it is NOT me who is living in a dream world? City by giving EVERYBODY the benefit of that cheap season ticket is giving everybody (regardlless of whether they can afford to pay more or not) the equivalent of a 'Universal Benefit'. What I think would make more sense is to make it a 'Means-tested' 'benefit'/discount. ie if people can prove money is tight ie unwaged/benefits/pen sioners etc it SHOULD be cheaper. But NOT for everyone ie those who can afford to spend freely on the sort of merchandise/refreshm ents sold expensively at 'VP.' I don't call that unreasonable -I call that FAIR! Oh and by the way, I would issue with you about the fact the unemployed are not entitled to a pleasure/liesure activity once in a while (after all they've gor five days to go down to the JobCentre Plus/scour the papers for work!! Don't be so 'judgemental'!!

Complete twaddle.
.
Your missing the point, the 6000 isn't all adult tickets. Therefore you can't just slap £150 on and expect them to pay it.
.
If 6000 have season tickets already, how many do you think will pay an extra £150 now after already paying for next seasons ticket?
.
Would you be happy if you booked a holiday then just before you were about to fly they asked you for another £100?
.
If you are getting job seekers allowance you have to prioritise. Meals and a roof over your head or a football game.
.
Do you have a house and family to support btw?

Who wants a 10,000 seater stadium? I'm sure both the Bulls and City would want at least a minimum of 20,000 as they are both averaging well over 10,000 without further success on the pitch.
Bradford has missed the boat too many times already and this will be no different this time.
Anyone with the vision & drive and capital would see that the area around Odsal is there with the potential for not only Bulls & City fans, but also other sports facilities.
Now would be good time to drive a hard bargain on building costs but provide work for local people.
We need people to start thinking outside the box and to kick the elephant out of the room. Come on somebody!

People keep going on and on about the cheap season tickets. Thats not the issue really.
It been stated before that having more supporters buying cheaper tickets works out the same as less supporters buying more expensive tickets.
.
So can we omve away from whinging about this please. Its a futile argument and has no merit.
.
The real problem is the 17years running on the remaining lease.
.
Look at the simple math (and this is just the money to Gibb, not hte rant to Prudential for the offices)-
.
£700,000 a year.
Thats £11.9million over 17years.
(Not a bad investment considering he bought the ground for only 2.5mil!)
.
City cannot just up sticks and change grounds. Mr Gibb is not going to stand idly by and let nearly 12million pounds be forgotten.
.
I dont believe that Gibb will agree to let city out of their deal in any way, and why should he!!
.
Its either get reduced terms, with an agreement to pay the reduced amount back later (when we are in a better league, if ever) or admin, and endless lawsuits from Mr Gibb who will fight hammer and tong for his dosh.
.
Sad, but true.
Bradford council, why dont you take stock and invest your money in something wise for a change. say 7mil to but the stadium back and then rent it to us at a cheaper rate..
Their really is no easy way out of this situation.

At the end of the day whatever a the solution is you would need a council with vision and foresight, something you could could never accuse Bradford Council of ever having

To 'Thee voice of reason' -
I am not going to talk about my personal circumstances, but I will say that clearly you are used to flying abroad in planes which is more than I do as I haven't been abroad for many years! (or had a holiday either for that matter!!) As to my 'missing the point'-the point is surely you want the discounted offer to carry on indefinitely-you never deny this/I think it is unrealistic to expect that it should. Yes, it's true that once you've paid for something/you shouldn't have to pay any more-in 'normal circumstances'! But at City, '25 year season ticket' holders have had to carry on paying each season, despite paying their 'upfront' charge all those years ago. If City went into 'Admin' all those who paid for a season ticket for 2011/12 could conceivably lose their money/perhaps have to pay more-so it's not a completely unknown 'idea.' And yes, I do 'Get It' about the kids/pensioners.
A way round that would be to allow for 'transferable' tickets for kids/families-to allow them to see some matches but perhaps not all. The pensioners could get the discount ticket as before.
I believe the 'real twaddle' here is to expect to go to see a professional football match for £6 (regardless of whether the person can afford to pay double that or not!!) And it is THAT 'twaddle' that is perilously coming close to finishing the club..we all care about!!

City fans do not want to come to Odsal, Bulls' fans do not want to go to Valley Parade. Sense and reason do not come in to it.
Anyhow, I remember the last time we hosted City at Odsal. Remember the caging? Football attracts the under-belly of society. Remember what the Leeds United fans did at Odsal last time they were there?
The Bulls' do not need City. City do not need Valley Parade. When they are in the Conference, ground-sharing with Park Avenue at Horsfall Playing Fields will be sufficient for their fans.
Bradford was, is and always will be a Rugby League city so the Bulls should be making their plans without the distraction of helping an ailing and fading football team.

tricky dicky...........go forth and multiply
you muppet

WE never sold 10000 season tickets in the championship or league one so that it was i base my facts on. The problems are not of the cheap season tickets as the board have said if we get the right amount of takers the money is the same. The biggest problem is having a wage budget in excess of one and a half million in this league. No other league two club pay this year in year out. We need to sort the budgets out and live within our means

Cityman23 wrote:
To 'Thee voice of reason' - I am not going to talk about my personal circumstances, but I will say that clearly you are used to flying abroad in planes which is more than I do as I haven't been abroad for many years! (or had a holiday either for that matter!!) As to my 'missing the point'-the point is surely you want the discounted offer to carry on indefinitely-you never deny this/I think it is unrealistic to expect that it should. Yes, it's true that once you've paid for something/you shouldn't have to pay any more-in 'normal circumstances'! But at City, '25 year season ticket' holders have had to carry on paying each season, despite paying their 'upfront' charge all those years ago. If City went into 'Admin' all those who paid for a season ticket for 2011/12 could conceivably lose their money/perhaps have to pay more-so it's not a completely unknown 'idea.' And yes, I do 'Get It' about the kids/pensioners. A way round that would be to allow for 'transferable' tickets for kids/families-to allow them to see some matches but perhaps not all. The pensioners could get the discount ticket as before. I believe the 'real twaddle' here is to expect to go to see a professional football match for £6 (regardless of whether the person can afford to pay double that or not!!) And it is THAT 'twaddle' that is perilously coming close to finishing the club..we all care about!!

Firstly the bit about the holiday was just done as an example, it could have been about a restaurant, the cinema, etc. That’s all it was an example so do read anything about my personal circumstances into it. It's the same basis you can't turn round and expect someone to pay for something they have already paid for in good faith.
.
The unlieing truth here is, Mr Rhodes and Mr Lawn release season tickets and set the price. They know what the overheads are before they start. In business your main aim it to cover your overheads then try and generate a little profit for yourself. If Rhodes and Lawn are underpricing the tickets so they don't meet their overheads knowing full well what they are, then it's their fault. No one is forcing to sell them this cheap.
.
They can raise season ticket prices to what they see fair it their right, but they have no right to expect those who paid back in december in good faith to part with anymore money in my opinion.
.
What has been sold back in December is gone, those fans have paid, they have to now set the prices for those who haven't renewed to cover any shortfall and build a budget to match.
.
This seems lost on a lot of people and they are ready to point at Gibb, Mr Morrison, etc other than ask the question, who is budgetting and why is this happening?

Irish Bantam - thanks for providing the evidence!

If, and it is a big if, the council did buy VP, it would be a fully council owned assett. They could rent it back to City at 500k per year all in, which would cover the cost of the origianl purchase within 10 years and then provide a 'sports income stream' to the council which they could reinvest at grassroots across the city in all aspects of sport.

The council would be in a win win situation as they would be perpetually generating a 500k income stream and own the land and buildings VP currently occupies.

Neither the Bulls nor City have a pot to p!ss in, so how on earth do we expect the clubs to build a new stadium to share. Some people on here just haven't got a clue.
.
As for the debate about how many fans we got if we added £100 to EVERY season ticket sold, of course it would have a massive impact. Huddersfield's adult season ticket may be £250 or whatever, but I bet they don't charge the kids in excess of £175 to watch (as this would be the proposal by adding £100)!!
.
Prior to the cheap season ticket offers, we were getting gates (which includes ticket sales as well as season tickets) of just 8,700ave. That was in League 1, so why are we expecting to still get over 10,000 in this league? Of the above figures, I would estimate that only 6,500 were actual season ticket holders and they remain our core fan base. The remaining 4,000 fans are only here because of the cheap tickets. If you pull the plug on them, they will go and we will go back to getting crowds of just over 6,500.
.
Financially we wouldn't be any better off and would be risking losing some of the core fan base too. As an example, for the past few years, I have bought 2x adult tickets and 1x child tickets at a cost of around £375. Using the inflated prices (suggested by some above), my new cost would be £675, a figure I simply wouldn't be able to afford...!
.
If Gibbs is refusing to discuss alternatives with us and we do have some form of 'get out clause', I suggest we go for it and move into Odsal, even if temporarily. We should ensure the memorial is moved with us and located at the top of Rooley Lane.
.
The one thing I would love to know is why does the expenditure at the club costs us so much? Surely insurance, gas, water, electric, rates etc shouldn't be costing us over £700k p/a? It isn't the rent that is crippling us, it is these additional overheads...!

Firstly, the cheap season ticket issue is a red-herring. As pointed out above, having 10,000 fans at £150 brings in the same value as having 5,000 at £300. Simple fact is that City should be applauded for their vision of providing football at an affordable price. Exterior factors have dampened its impact but the Chairmen should be proud of what they have done, bringing over 10,000 fans to watch the worst football the majority of fans have ever seen.

*
We need to know what the implications of getting out of the lease would be should we be forced to move? From my limited knowledge of the situation it appears that the only way out would be a third administration, something that the majority of fans would be extremely weary of and would no doubt result in implications from both the Football League and potentially the Gibb Family Pension Fund who are owed at present (based on quoted figures) a further £13m as a result of the existing lease they hold.

*
Both sides should be keen to avoid the situation escalating to a point where BCFC are forced into moving. From the Football Club's side, there's no knowing the consequences we might face should we enter a third administration and there are no guarantees we would exit that administration this time. It would be a massive gamble, something which Mark Lawn claims he isn't prepared to do (gamble with BCFC's future). Also, where's the value in the Gibb Family Pension Fund allowing the situation to arise where he's left with an empty stadium with no-one paying him any rent and the only hope of making anything out of the site being selling parts for scrap. However, it's clear that in the current situation with the Pension Fund almost doubling its investment in the six years of the lease, they currently hold the better cards.

*
In previous articles either on this site or on other Bradford City related fora, a contributor mentioned they had written to Gordon Gibb to ask about the possibility of purchasing the ground back. In his response, Mr Gibb was clear that he would be happy to discuss any offers in line with the current market value of the property, on the face of it he doesn't seem un-reasonable and one wonders what is really going on when Bradford City say they've had no response from Gibb and he says he's not been contacted. Who is telling the truth? It's worth noting that it isn't Gordon Gibb that owns the stadium either, it's his family pension fund and there are rules which govern how investments with pension funds are to be managed. This means that a fair deal has to be reached that is in the best interests of the pension fund, in this case one would assume that negotiating reduced terms now whilst money is tight but would allow a steady stream of income for the pension fund to continue at a reduced risk that they would lose their only likely tenants. Plus, if negotiation was done properly and was in the best interests of both sides, the likelihood would be that in further years should the reduced rental costs allow increased investment on the field which resulted in a move back up the footballing pyramidp then they would benefit from the increased revenue coming into the club through an increase in rent.

*
Finally, the talk of the Bantams moving to Odsal needs to happen, it is after all the cheapest option presently available. However, the sensible option would be for the council who already own Odsal to purchase back Valley Parade from the Gibb Family Pension Fund and then charge rent which would ultimately mean a return on the investment made. The Bulls and Bantams could share Valley Parade as being their Match Day Stadium whilst Odsal and Richard Dunn's could be developed into a smaller Sports Village that could provide training facilities for both professional sides as well as the city's university and other grass root level organisations. It wouldn't be an expensive investment, it would certainly cost lest initially than the City Park that no one appears to want (£24m) and would be re-paid over a number of years by the Bulls and Bantams allowing the Sports Village to be cost neutral or even profit making. It would be a real feather in the cap for a Council who at present have lost the faith of their constituents and also the Government who this week refused them a share of Government funding. I'm sick of Bradford Council throwing good money after bad, it's about time they listened to the people of Bradford and started making investments in areas that would bring a return.

*
I know I may get some defensive responses from Bulls fans who claim that Valley Parade is in a rough area with no parking but this simply isn't the case. As a Bantam of over 25 years, I have never suffered from violence or crime whilst visiting and manage to park within walking distance, usually in the exact same spot each visit. I appreciate that the Bulls fans would be as reluctant to move from Odsal as the Bantams would be to move from Valley Parade but it is the most sensible solution to the problems that both clubs currently face. The finances would be better for the bantams and we'd get new training facilities at Odsal. For the Bulls, there'd be no issues with their Super League Franchise and Odsal gets its sports village.

Waynus71 wrote:
Neither the Bulls nor City have a pot to p!ss in, so how on earth do we expect the clubs to build a new stadium to share. Some people on here just haven't got a clue. . As for the debate about how many fans we got if we added £100 to EVERY season ticket sold, of course it would have a massive impact. Huddersfield's adult season ticket may be £250 or whatever, but I bet they don't charge the kids in excess of £175 to watch (as this would be the proposal by adding £100)!! . Prior to the cheap season ticket offers, we were getting gates (which includes ticket sales as well as season tickets) of just 8,700ave. That was in League 1, so why are we expecting to still get over 10,000 in this league? Of the above figures, I would estimate that only 6,500 were actual season ticket holders and they remain our core fan base. The remaining 4,000 fans are only here because of the cheap tickets. If you pull the plug on them, they will go and we will go back to getting crowds of just over 6,500. . Financially we wouldn't be any better off and would be risking losing some of the core fan base too. As an example, for the past few years, I have bought 2x adult tickets and 1x child tickets at a cost of around £375. Using the inflated prices (suggested by some above), my new cost would be £675, a figure I simply wouldn't be able to afford...! . If Gibbs is refusing to discuss alternatives with us and we do have some form of 'get out clause', I suggest we go for it and move into Odsal, even if temporarily. We should ensure the memorial is moved with us and located at the top of Rooley Lane. . The one thing I would love to know is why does the expenditure at the club costs us so much? Surely insurance, gas, water, electric, rates etc shouldn't be costing us over £700k p/a? It isn't the rent that is crippling us, it is these additional overheads...!

Who is suggesting the Bulls and City buy a stadium to share?

Who is suggesting the Bulls and City buy a stadium to share?
.
I'm glad you realise that you can't just put £100 on a ticket and expect everyone to pay it regardless. At least thats two of us in the real world.

Maxpowers83 wrote:
Firstly, the cheap season ticket issue is a red-herring. As pointed out above, having 10,000 fans at £150 brings in the same value as having 5,000 at £300. Simple fact is that City should be applauded for their vision of providing football at an affordable price. Exterior factors have dampened its impact but the Chairmen should be proud of what they have done, bringing over 10,000 fans to watch the worst football the majority of fans have ever seen.

*
We need to know what the implications of getting out of the lease would be should we be forced to move? From my limited knowledge of the situation it appears that the only way out would be a third administration, something that the majority of fans would be extremely weary of and would no doubt result in implications from both the Football League and potentially the Gibb Family Pension Fund who are owed at present (based on quoted figures) a further £13m as a result of the existing lease they hold.

*
Both sides should be keen to avoid the situation escalating to a point where BCFC are forced into moving. From the Football Club's side, there's no knowing the consequences we might face should we enter a third administration and there are no guarantees we would exit that administration this time. It would be a massive gamble, something which Mark Lawn claims he isn't prepared to do (gamble with BCFC's future). Also, where's the value in the Gibb Family Pension Fund allowing the situation to arise where he's left with an empty stadium with no-one paying him any rent and the only hope of making anything out of the site being selling parts for scrap. However, it's clear that in the current situation with the Pension Fund almost doubling its investment in the six years of the lease, they currently hold the better cards.

*
In previous articles either on this site or on other Bradford City related fora, a contributor mentioned they had written to Gordon Gibb to ask about the possibility of purchasing the ground back. In his response, Mr Gibb was clear that he would be happy to discuss any offers in line with the current market value of the property, on the face of it he doesn't seem un-reasonable and one wonders what is really going on when Bradford City say they've had no response from Gibb and he says he's not been contacted. Who is telling the truth? It's worth noting that it isn't Gordon Gibb that owns the stadium either, it's his family pension fund and there are rules which govern how investments with pension funds are to be managed. This means that a fair deal has to be reached that is in the best interests of the pension fund, in this case one would assume that negotiating reduced terms now whilst money is tight but would allow a steady stream of income for the pension fund to continue at a reduced risk that they would lose their only likely tenants. Plus, if negotiation was done properly and was in the best interests of both sides, the likelihood would be that in further years should the reduced rental costs allow increased investment on the field which resulted in a move back up the footballing pyramidp then they would benefit from the increased revenue coming into the club through an increase in rent.

*
Finally, the talk of the Bantams moving to Odsal needs to happen, it is after all the cheapest option presently available. However, the sensible option would be for the council who already own Odsal to purchase back Valley Parade from the Gibb Family Pension Fund and then charge rent which would ultimately mean a return on the investment made. The Bulls and Bantams could share Valley Parade as being their Match Day Stadium whilst Odsal and Richard Dunn's could be developed into a smaller Sports Village that could provide training facilities for both professional sides as well as the city's university and other grass root level organisations. It wouldn't be an expensive investment, it would certainly cost lest initially than the City Park that no one appears to want (£24m) and would be re-paid over a number of years by the Bulls and Bantams allowing the Sports Village to be cost neutral or even profit making. It would be a real feather in the cap for a Council who at present have lost the faith of their constituents and also the Government who this week refused them a share of Government funding. I'm sick of Bradford Council throwing good money after bad, it's about time they listened to the people of Bradford and started making investments in areas that would bring a return.

*
I know I may get some defensive responses from Bulls fans who claim that Valley Parade is in a rough area with no parking but this simply isn't the case. As a Bantam of over 25 years, I have never suffered from violence or crime whilst visiting and manage to park within walking distance, usually in the exact same spot each visit. I appreciate that the Bulls fans would be as reluctant to move from Odsal as the Bantams would be to move from Valley Parade but it is the most sensible solution to the problems that both clubs currently face. The finances would be better for the bantams and we'd get new training facilities at Odsal. For the Bulls, there'd be no issues with their Super League Franchise and Odsal gets its sports village.

one major flaw. Why would the current owners of valley parade sell to a council that already has no money and as was said before why should our tax payers one go to private owned company? The same arguement was made for sporting village which would have cost less as far as investment was concerned.

irish bantam wrote:

MECCA BINGO wrote:
City will never move to Odsal. Your football club is a joke, just look at what your still paying the players! that's partly why your in the current mess. I for one would not want to see City it Odsal would much rather Bradford Park came to Join us. Sorry that's the truth your all pie in the sky men living in the past, now without a pot to **** in.

mecca bingo.....just read your comments............

.....as far as pie in the sky !!! the bulls are not exactly setting the super league alight are they? and they too have done the cheaper season tickets. With or without a pot to p-ss in as you say....city will and always have been better supported than the bulls and their ground and facilities are far superior than at wind blown/ scruffy odsal tip..........and as far as living in the past.....people who live in glass houses come to mind......bully bully!!!

MECCA BINGO wrote:
City will never move to Odsal. Your football club is a joke, just look at what your still paying the players! that's partly why your in the current mess. I for one would not want to see City it Odsal would much rather Bradford Park came to Join us. Sorry that's the truth your all pie in the sky men living in the past, now without a pot to **** in.

mecca bingo.....just read your comments............

.....as far as pie in the sky !!! the bulls are not exactly setting the super league alight are they? and they too have done the cheaper season tickets. With or without a pot to p-ss in as you say....city will and always have been better supported than the bulls and their ground and facilities are far superior than at wind blown/ scruffy odsal tip..........and as far as living in the past.....people who live in glass houses come to mind......bully bully!!!


Odsal might be a tip, but it sure beats your ground, sorry my mistake its not yours anymore! get real your living beyond your means just like most football clubs.

Adey wrote:

Maxpowers83 wrote: Firstly, the cheap season ticket issue is a red-herring. As pointed out above, having 10,000 fans at £150 brings in the same value as having 5,000 at £300. Simple fact is that City should be applauded for their vision of providing football at an affordable price. Exterior factors have dampened its impact but the Chairmen should be proud of what they have done, bringing over 10,000 fans to watch the worst football the majority of fans have ever seen. * We need to know what the implications of getting out of the lease would be should we be forced to move? From my limited knowledge of the situation it appears that the only way out would be a third administration, something that the majority of fans would be extremely weary of and would no doubt result in implications from both the Football League and potentially the Gibb Family Pension Fund who are owed at present (based on quoted figures) a further £13m as a result of the existing lease they hold. * Both sides should be keen to avoid the situation escalating to a point where BCFC are forced into moving. From the Football Club's side, there's no knowing the consequences we might face should we enter a third administration and there are no guarantees we would exit that administration this time. It would be a massive gamble, something which Mark Lawn claims he isn't prepared to do (gamble with BCFC's future). Also, where's the value in the Gibb Family Pension Fund allowing the situation to arise where he's left with an empty stadium with no-one paying him any rent and the only hope of making anything out of the site being selling parts for scrap. However, it's clear that in the current situation with the Pension Fund almost doubling its investment in the six years of the lease, they currently hold the better cards. * In previous articles either on this site or on other Bradford City related fora, a contributor mentioned they had written to Gordon Gibb to ask about the possibility of purchasing the ground back. In his response, Mr Gibb was clear that he would be happy to discuss any offers in line with the current market value of the property, on the face of it he doesn't seem un-reasonable and one wonders what is really going on when Bradford City say they've had no response from Gibb and he says he's not been contacted. Who is telling the truth? It's worth noting that it isn't Gordon Gibb that owns the stadium either, it's his family pension fund and there are rules which govern how investments with pension funds are to be managed. This means that a fair deal has to be reached that is in the best interests of the pension fund, in this case one would assume that negotiating reduced terms now whilst money is tight but would allow a steady stream of income for the pension fund to continue at a reduced risk that they would lose their only likely tenants. Plus, if negotiation was done properly and was in the best interests of both sides, the likelihood would be that in further years should the reduced rental costs allow increased investment on the field which resulted in a move back up the footballing pyramidp then they would benefit from the increased revenue coming into the club through an increase in rent. * Finally, the talk of the Bantams moving to Odsal needs to happen, it is after all the cheapest option presently available. However, the sensible option would be for the council who already own Odsal to purchase back Valley Parade from the Gibb Family Pension Fund and then charge rent which would ultimately mean a return on the investment made. The Bulls and Bantams could share Valley Parade as being their Match Day Stadium whilst Odsal and Richard Dunn's could be developed into a smaller Sports Village that could provide training facilities for both professional sides as well as the city's university and other grass root level organisations. It wouldn't be an expensive investment, it would certainly cost lest initially than the City Park that no one appears to want (£24m) and would be re-paid over a number of years by the Bulls and Bantams allowing the Sports Village to be cost neutral or even profit making. It would be a real feather in the cap for a Council who at present have lost the faith of their constituents and also the Government who this week refused them a share of Government funding. I'm sick of Bradford Council throwing good money after bad, it's about time they listened to the people of Bradford and started making investments in areas that would bring a return. * I know I may get some defensive responses from Bulls fans who claim that Valley Parade is in a rough area with no parking but this simply isn't the case. As a Bantam of over 25 years, I have never suffered from violence or crime whilst visiting and manage to park within walking distance, usually in the exact same spot each visit. I appreciate that the Bulls fans would be as reluctant to move from Odsal as the Bantams would be to move from Valley Parade but it is the most sensible solution to the problems that both clubs currently face. The finances would be better for the bantams and we'd get new training facilities at Odsal. For the Bulls, there'd be no issues with their Super League Franchise and Odsal gets its sports village.

one major flaw. Why would the current owners of valley parade sell to a council that already has no money and as was said before why should our tax payers one go to private owned company? The same arguement was made for sporting village which would have cost less as far as investment was concerned.

Adey,

I appreciate what you're saying but I'm merely proposing the council invest some tax-payers money rather than give it to private business.

Let's say that it would cost the council £7m to buy Valley Parade. If they charged BCFC £500k a year it would take 14 years before their initial investment had been paid back and they were making profit. It would also be that the council could re-negotiate sensible increases should the fortunes of the club allow it so the profit margin would increase.

*
If the council were to invest a little more, they could create what both clubs need which would be training and fitness centres at Odsal which would also be available to both academies for the creation of further generations of stars as well as other grass roots organisations local to Bradford and the University.

*
It gives you a sports village for a fraction of the cost of the original plan which if managed properly, would pay for itself.

Maxpowers83 wrote:

Adey wrote:

Maxpowers83 wrote: Firstly, the cheap season ticket issue is a red-herring. As pointed out above, having 10,000 fans at £150 brings in the same value as having 5,000 at £300. Simple fact is that City should be applauded for their vision of providing football at an affordable price. Exterior factors have dampened its impact but the Chairmen should be proud of what they have done, bringing over 10,000 fans to watch the worst football the majority of fans have ever seen. * We need to know what the implications of getting out of the lease would be should we be forced to move? From my limited knowledge of the situation it appears that the only way out would be a third administration, something that the majority of fans would be extremely weary of and would no doubt result in implications from both the Football League and potentially the Gibb Family Pension Fund who are owed at present (based on quoted figures) a further £13m as a result of the existing lease they hold. * Both sides should be keen to avoid the situation escalating to a point where BCFC are forced into moving. From the Football Club's side, there's no knowing the consequences we might face should we enter a third administration and there are no guarantees we would exit that administration this time. It would be a massive gamble, something which Mark Lawn claims he isn't prepared to do (gamble with BCFC's future). Also, where's the value in the Gibb Family Pension Fund allowing the situation to arise where he's left with an empty stadium with no-one paying him any rent and the only hope of making anything out of the site being selling parts for scrap. However, it's clear that in the current situation with the Pension Fund almost doubling its investment in the six years of the lease, they currently hold the better cards. * In previous articles either on this site or on other Bradford City related fora, a contributor mentioned they had written to Gordon Gibb to ask about the possibility of purchasing the ground back. In his response, Mr Gibb was clear that he would be happy to discuss any offers in line with the current market value of the property, on the face of it he doesn't seem un-reasonable and one wonders what is really going on when Bradford City say they've had no response from Gibb and he says he's not been contacted. Who is telling the truth? It's worth noting that it isn't Gordon Gibb that owns the stadium either, it's his family pension fund and there are rules which govern how investments with pension funds are to be managed. This means that a fair deal has to be reached that is in the best interests of the pension fund, in this case one would assume that negotiating reduced terms now whilst money is tight but would allow a steady stream of income for the pension fund to continue at a reduced risk that they would lose their only likely tenants. Plus, if negotiation was done properly and was in the best interests of both sides, the likelihood would be that in further years should the reduced rental costs allow increased investment on the field which resulted in a move back up the footballing pyramidp then they would benefit from the increased revenue coming into the club through an increase in rent. * Finally, the talk of the Bantams moving to Odsal needs to happen, it is after all the cheapest option presently available. However, the sensible option would be for the council who already own Odsal to purchase back Valley Parade from the Gibb Family Pension Fund and then charge rent which would ultimately mean a return on the investment made. The Bulls and Bantams could share Valley Parade as being their Match Day Stadium whilst Odsal and Richard Dunn's could be developed into a smaller Sports Village that could provide training facilities for both professional sides as well as the city's university and other grass root level organisations. It wouldn't be an expensive investment, it would certainly cost lest initially than the City Park that no one appears to want (£24m) and would be re-paid over a number of years by the Bulls and Bantams allowing the Sports Village to be cost neutral or even profit making. It would be a real feather in the cap for a Council who at present have lost the faith of their constituents and also the Government who this week refused them a share of Government funding. I'm sick of Bradford Council throwing good money after bad, it's about time they listened to the people of Bradford and started making investments in areas that would bring a return. * I know I may get some defensive responses from Bulls fans who claim that Valley Parade is in a rough area with no parking but this simply isn't the case. As a Bantam of over 25 years, I have never suffered from violence or crime whilst visiting and manage to park within walking distance, usually in the exact same spot each visit. I appreciate that the Bulls fans would be as reluctant to move from Odsal as the Bantams would be to move from Valley Parade but it is the most sensible solution to the problems that both clubs currently face. The finances would be better for the bantams and we'd get new training facilities at Odsal. For the Bulls, there'd be no issues with their Super League Franchise and Odsal gets its sports village.

one major flaw. Why would the current owners of valley parade sell to a council that already has no money and as was said before why should our tax payers one go to private owned company? The same arguement was made for sporting village which would have cost less as far as investment was concerned.

Adey, I appreciate what you're saying but I'm merely proposing the council invest some tax-payers money rather than give it to private business. Let's say that it would cost the council £7m to buy Valley Parade. If they charged BCFC £500k a year it would take 14 years before their initial investment had been paid back and they were making profit. It would also be that the council could re-negotiate sensible increases should the fortunes of the club allow it so the profit margin would increase. * If the council were to invest a little more, they could create what both clubs need which would be training and fitness centres at Odsal which would also be available to both academies for the creation of further generations of stars as well as other grass roots organisations local to Bradford and the University. * It gives you a sports village for a fraction of the cost of the original plan which if managed properly, would pay for itself.

If city can't afford £370k rent from Gibb, how would they afford £500k rent from the council?
.
The overheads would still exist, as would the lease to the car park and offices.

Maxpowers83 wrote:

Adey wrote:

Maxpowers83 wrote: Firstly, the cheap season ticket issue is a red-herring. As pointed out above, having 10,000 fans at £150 brings in the same value as having 5,000 at £300. Simple fact is that City should be applauded for their vision of providing football at an affordable price. Exterior factors have dampened its impact but the Chairmen should be proud of what they have done, bringing over 10,000 fans to watch the worst football the majority of fans have ever seen. * We need to know what the implications of getting out of the lease would be should we be forced to move? From my limited knowledge of the situation it appears that the only way out would be a third administration, something that the majority of fans would be extremely weary of and would no doubt result in implications from both the Football League and potentially the Gibb Family Pension Fund who are owed at present (based on quoted figures) a further £13m as a result of the existing lease they hold. * Both sides should be keen to avoid the situation escalating to a point where BCFC are forced into moving. From the Football Club's side, there's no knowing the consequences we might face should we enter a third administration and there are no guarantees we would exit that administration this time. It would be a massive gamble, something which Mark Lawn claims he isn't prepared to do (gamble with BCFC's future). Also, where's the value in the Gibb Family Pension Fund allowing the situation to arise where he's left with an empty stadium with no-one paying him any rent and the only hope of making anything out of the site being selling parts for scrap. However, it's clear that in the current situation with the Pension Fund almost doubling its investment in the six years of the lease, they currently hold the better cards. * In previous articles either on this site or on other Bradford City related fora, a contributor mentioned they had written to Gordon Gibb to ask about the possibility of purchasing the ground back. In his response, Mr Gibb was clear that he would be happy to discuss any offers in line with the current market value of the property, on the face of it he doesn't seem un-reasonable and one wonders what is really going on when Bradford City say they've had no response from Gibb and he says he's not been contacted. Who is telling the truth? It's worth noting that it isn't Gordon Gibb that owns the stadium either, it's his family pension fund and there are rules which govern how investments with pension funds are to be managed. This means that a fair deal has to be reached that is in the best interests of the pension fund, in this case one would assume that negotiating reduced terms now whilst money is tight but would allow a steady stream of income for the pension fund to continue at a reduced risk that they would lose their only likely tenants. Plus, if negotiation was done properly and was in the best interests of both sides, the likelihood would be that in further years should the reduced rental costs allow increased investment on the field which resulted in a move back up the footballing pyramidp then they would benefit from the increased revenue coming into the club through an increase in rent. * Finally, the talk of the Bantams moving to Odsal needs to happen, it is after all the cheapest option presently available. However, the sensible option would be for the council who already own Odsal to purchase back Valley Parade from the Gibb Family Pension Fund and then charge rent which would ultimately mean a return on the investment made. The Bulls and Bantams could share Valley Parade as being their Match Day Stadium whilst Odsal and Richard Dunn's could be developed into a smaller Sports Village that could provide training facilities for both professional sides as well as the city's university and other grass root level organisations. It wouldn't be an expensive investment, it would certainly cost lest initially than the City Park that no one appears to want (£24m) and would be re-paid over a number of years by the Bulls and Bantams allowing the Sports Village to be cost neutral or even profit making. It would be a real feather in the cap for a Council who at present have lost the faith of their constituents and also the Government who this week refused them a share of Government funding. I'm sick of Bradford Council throwing good money after bad, it's about time they listened to the people of Bradford and started making investments in areas that would bring a return. * I know I may get some defensive responses from Bulls fans who claim that Valley Parade is in a rough area with no parking but this simply isn't the case. As a Bantam of over 25 years, I have never suffered from violence or crime whilst visiting and manage to park within walking distance, usually in the exact same spot each visit. I appreciate that the Bulls fans would be as reluctant to move from Odsal as the Bantams would be to move from Valley Parade but it is the most sensible solution to the problems that both clubs currently face. The finances would be better for the bantams and we'd get new training facilities at Odsal. For the Bulls, there'd be no issues with their Super League Franchise and Odsal gets its sports village.

one major flaw. Why would the current owners of valley parade sell to a council that already has no money and as was said before why should our tax payers one go to private owned company? The same arguement was made for sporting village which would have cost less as far as investment was concerned.

Adey,

I appreciate what you're saying but I'm merely proposing the council invest some tax-payers money rather than give it to private business.

Let's say that it would cost the council £7m to buy Valley Parade. If they charged BCFC £500k a year it would take 14 years before their initial investment had been paid back and they were making profit. It would also be that the council could re-negotiate sensible increases should the fortunes of the club allow it so the profit margin would increase.

*
If the council were to invest a little more, they could create what both clubs need which would be training and fitness centres at Odsal which would also be available to both academies for the creation of further generations of stars as well as other grass roots organisations local to Bradford and the University.

*
It gives you a sports village for a fraction of the cost of the original plan which if managed properly, would pay for itself.

ok say they have 19 years to run at 1.25 million quid that's 23.75 million quid...why would any businessman in his right mind allow a buy out for anything less than half? And that's investment that the council already said wouldn't be spent on odsal. Buying the lease out shouldn't come from tax payers money but from city directly...it is a private business afterall...as is the owner of valley parade.

Adey wrote:

Maxpowers83 wrote:

Adey wrote:

Maxpowers83 wrote: Firstly, the cheap season ticket issue is a red-herring. As pointed out above, having 10,000 fans at £150 brings in the same value as having 5,000 at £300. Simple fact is that City should be applauded for their vision of providing football at an affordable price. Exterior factors have dampened its impact but the Chairmen should be proud of what they have done, bringing over 10,000 fans to watch the worst football the majority of fans have ever seen. * We need to know what the implications of getting out of the lease would be should we be forced to move? From my limited knowledge of the situation it appears that the only way out would be a third administration, something that the majority of fans would be extremely weary of and would no doubt result in implications from both the Football League and potentially the Gibb Family Pension Fund who are owed at present (based on quoted figures) a further £13m as a result of the existing lease they hold. * Both sides should be keen to avoid the situation escalating to a point where BCFC are forced into moving. From the Football Club's side, there's no knowing the consequences we might face should we enter a third administration and there are no guarantees we would exit that administration this time. It would be a massive gamble, something which Mark Lawn claims he isn't prepared to do (gamble with BCFC's future). Also, where's the value in the Gibb Family Pension Fund allowing the situation to arise where he's left with an empty stadium with no-one paying him any rent and the only hope of making anything out of the site being selling parts for scrap. However, it's clear that in the current situation with the Pension Fund almost doubling its investment in the six years of the lease, they currently hold the better cards. * In previous articles either on this site or on other Bradford City related fora, a contributor mentioned they had written to Gordon Gibb to ask about the possibility of purchasing the ground back. In his response, Mr Gibb was clear that he would be happy to discuss any offers in line with the current market value of the property, on the face of it he doesn't seem un-reasonable and one wonders what is really going on when Bradford City say they've had no response from Gibb and he says he's not been contacted. Who is telling the truth? It's worth noting that it isn't Gordon Gibb that owns the stadium either, it's his family pension fund and there are rules which govern how investments with pension funds are to be managed. This means that a fair deal has to be reached that is in the best interests of the pension fund, in this case one would assume that negotiating reduced terms now whilst money is tight but would allow a steady stream of income for the pension fund to continue at a reduced risk that they would lose their only likely tenants. Plus, if negotiation was done properly and was in the best interests of both sides, the likelihood would be that in further years should the reduced rental costs allow increased investment on the field which resulted in a move back up the footballing pyramidp then they would benefit from the increased revenue coming into the club through an increase in rent. * Finally, the talk of the Bantams moving to Odsal needs to happen, it is after all the cheapest option presently available. However, the sensible option would be for the council who already own Odsal to purchase back Valley Parade from the Gibb Family Pension Fund and then charge rent which would ultimately mean a return on the investment made. The Bulls and Bantams could share Valley Parade as being their Match Day Stadium whilst Odsal and Richard Dunn's could be developed into a smaller Sports Village that could provide training facilities for both professional sides as well as the city's university and other grass root level organisations. It wouldn't be an expensive investment, it would certainly cost lest initially than the City Park that no one appears to want (£24m) and would be re-paid over a number of years by the Bulls and Bantams allowing the Sports Village to be cost neutral or even profit making. It would be a real feather in the cap for a Council who at present have lost the faith of their constituents and also the Government who this week refused them a share of Government funding. I'm sick of Bradford Council throwing good money after bad, it's about time they listened to the people of Bradford and started making investments in areas that would bring a return. * I know I may get some defensive responses from Bulls fans who claim that Valley Parade is in a rough area with no parking but this simply isn't the case. As a Bantam of over 25 years, I have never suffered from violence or crime whilst visiting and manage to park within walking distance, usually in the exact same spot each visit. I appreciate that the Bulls fans would be as reluctant to move from Odsal as the Bantams would be to move from Valley Parade but it is the most sensible solution to the problems that both clubs currently face. The finances would be better for the bantams and we'd get new training facilities at Odsal. For the Bulls, there'd be no issues with their Super League Franchise and Odsal gets its sports village.

one major flaw. Why would the current owners of valley parade sell to a council that already has no money and as was said before why should our tax payers one go to private owned company? The same arguement was made for sporting village which would have cost less as far as investment was concerned.

Adey, I appreciate what you're saying but I'm merely proposing the council invest some tax-payers money rather than give it to private business. Let's say that it would cost the council £7m to buy Valley Parade. If they charged BCFC £500k a year it would take 14 years before their initial investment had been paid back and they were making profit. It would also be that the council could re-negotiate sensible increases should the fortunes of the club allow it so the profit margin would increase. * If the council were to invest a little more, they could create what both clubs need which would be training and fitness centres at Odsal which would also be available to both academies for the creation of further generations of stars as well as other grass roots organisations local to Bradford and the University. * It gives you a sports village for a fraction of the cost of the original plan which if managed properly, would pay for itself.

ok say they have 19 years to run at 1.25 million quid that's 23.75 million quid...why would any businessman in his right mind allow a buy out for anything less than half? And that's investment that the council already said wouldn't be spent on odsal. Buying the lease out shouldn't come from tax payers money but from city directly...it is a private business afterall...as is the owner of valley parade.

Your figures are all wrong!
.
Bradford pay Gibb £370k a year for the stadium, they pay Perium £370k a year for the Car Park and Offices.
.
The £510k is for Heat & Light, Rates, Water, Insurance, etc, etc.
.
Why to stay at Odsal is it one fifth of this? (As per Mr Lawn). One Fifth wouldn't even cover the none lease/rent items.
.
Do we leave the floodlight on all the time and the taps constantly running?

Haha has a Bulls season ticket holder and a Newcastle fan who has no interest in city, I think the slagging of going on needs to stop, we talk about the council being indescisive, and hear we are tearing chunks out of each other

- Bulls would lose thousands of fans if they moved away from Odsal, simply because a large percentage of Bulls fans are from the odsal area,

- I would welcome City upto Odsal if it saved and helped them,

however lets not forget Bulls don't need to look for a new home, we are not in a finanacial mess which threatens our future, why in gods hell would we move to VP pay more rent, lose fans, just because City are in a mess,

We will always be in Super League, we do not need City, I hate to see City suffer and I hope you boys can turn it around, but this is your mess, move or don't it's up to your board

The Bulls can't move out of Odsal without triggering a multi million pound payment to the Council. This is money that was paid by the Council to the Bulls to get the Council out of the 1986 agreement when they bought Odsal and agreed an annual payment for its upkeep.

The Council tried for years to get out of owning Odsal and the costs of running it. VP may not cost as much to run but I can't see any politician being for the idea of buying it in the current climate when the city is utterly skint and having to close down other ammenities.

Anyway I fully expect City to come to some agreement with their landlords as it would seem stupid for them not to negotiate on the rent.

This will all blow over in a few weeks.

this is a debate thats been going on for years. should city go to odsal and the bulls go to valley parade. going back to 85/86. those days at odsal. views are good. but when the fog falls viewing is limited.
so as they say should we? the battle rolls on.

I am sitting thousands of miles away but I and my family have been supporters since I was a nipper back in the 60's. I understand the tribal responses from City and Bulls fans denigrating each other but looking from the outside it makes more sense for the Bulls to move to valley parade. If the owners from both teams made an offer to Gibb as a joint venture every one wins if a deal can be worked out. Putting City out of business is not a viable business decision for Gibb. Litigation is expensive and even if he wins he cant get blood from a turnip as the saying goes. He has already doubled his initial investment and will do the same again if he sells at a reasonable price. With the expenses split there is the opportunity to improve the ground as well as the teams. Its not a matter of whether you are a Bulls fan or a City fan. They dont have to be mutually exclusive . Why cant we all wish both teams success? With success comes money and revenue and recognition from successful people who may want to invest. There are not many rich Russians looking to throw money away. It has to be a good business proposition to attract an investor. Work together for a mutual benefit Mr Hood and Mr Rhodes. The long suffering fans from both teams deserve it.

" Voice of Reason" was talking about Railway Stations in the Centre Of The City. I have often thought they should be joined up. Especially as there is not much else in between. Or even an Underground link up . Or a tram system introduced.
*
" Re the train, people don't get the train because there is no station near either ground. I'll tell you now hundreds would get the train from the Keighley/Shipley side if it stopped just outside the ground.
*
There were plans to extend Forster Square Platforms to meet the bridge connecting Midland Road. Plus again there were plans to build a new station stop ouitside Valley Parade., and call it 'Valley Parade'.
*
No doubt they were all shelved. Any future ideas will not be developed, because of the current long term economic crises, throughout the world; caused by the major banks, in the world.

Bobby f - I don't understand folk like you. How can you support the Bulls for Rugby and Newcastle for Footy? I can only presume you are a Geordie living in Bradford.

I see lots of cars with Bulls stickers on one side of the rear window, and other football teams on the other.

I just don't get it! I don't follow Rugby, but If I did, I'd support the Bulls.

I found it quite sad that there is a stupid rivalry between 2 sports in the same City.

end of the day. the divide stands over city and the bulls. and to be honest im hoping city dont leave valley parade. something has got to give. granted the bulls do deserve a stadium thats on par with rugby league rules. but odsal is and i will say it a tip. it needs money pumping in. as for valley parade? it too needs a csh injection. but in these hard climates niether club is going to get on par. we aint leeds or wigan. but we as fans albeit city and the bulls have our own reasons not to ground share.
this has and will be the battle of bradford until some one comes up with a plan. two big teams and the city is locked in battle to survive. only bradfordians can help. not outsiders. listen bradford council. this is your own destiny to the battle of bradford. invest and the teams will thrive. dont invest and you will loose. like park avenue. the people of bradford rally and fight. stand up for our teams. this is bradford.

Sorry BCF are in a bad way, but this is not the Bulls problem.
I tried Valley Parade, it is a ''p** to p*** in''.
The stand is cold on sunny days...the playing area is too dangerous... I would not park my car anywhere near there. After 58 yrs supporting Northern/Bulls, to move to Valley Parade would end in disaster for Bulls support.

City and Northern should have been ground sharing years ago, the benefits are obvious, the only question is which ground, would be the best option, why don't they let the fans decide by voting on a given match day. Why support City in the second division watching great opposition like errr Burton or Accrington Stanley, when we could be in the Championship trashing L666s

good old brownie wrote:
Sorry BCF are in a bad way, but this is not the Bulls problem.
I tried Valley Parade, it is a ''p** to p*** in''.
The stand is cold on sunny days...the playing area is too dangerous... I would not park my car anywhere near there. After 58 yrs supporting Northern/Bulls, to move to Valley Parade would end in disaster for Bulls support.

Well said Brownie. don't really see what the City fans like about Valley Parade, its a joke them trying to raise money for the rent. Simple solution is to fold, I for one would not shed a single tear. Odsal may be a tip but Parade is a real dump I would bomb the whole area and start again Bradford is dead I'm so glad I got out five years ago but come back for Bulls games. Bradford as a whole is dead and has been taken over by non-football/sport loving, hire car, drug dealing, taxi driving, take away, car wash, I like the look of my sister, 7 families in a house types.

MECCA BINGO wrote:
City will never move to Odsal. Your football club is a joke, just look at what your still paying the players! that's partly why your in the current mess. I for one would not want to see City it Odsal would much rather Bradford Park came to Join us. Sorry that's the truth your all pie in the sky men living in the past, now without a pot to **** in.

Hey fella,if you're looking for a real laugh try Elland Road..CTID

Thee Voice of Reason wrote:

Cityman23 wrote:

Thee Voice of Reason wrote:

Cityman23 wrote: PS: If 10,000 fans stayed as season ticket holders paying £250 a year (extra £100), this would bring in an extra 10,000x 100 =£1 million !! This would cover the rent, without any money now in the City 'coffers' being used at all! Perhaps we wouldn't even be having this discussion!!

Because money doesn't grow on trees and many can't afford another £100 per year because at those figures you include children too who as it stands are free or very cheap.

To 'Thee Voice Of Reason' The truth is what I've already stated that many fans now see the current £150 not as a discount offer but as the 'true' value of a ticket and that's why we have problems (in increasing it). So it means then that (following your reasoning) many want to follow a professional football team (and they can't follow any others I know in the West Yorks. area at that price) at an unrealistically low price. ie one where costs can't be met/players are poor (because that's all we can get) we never can expect promotion and go down/down and finally out of existence altogether. What I often wonder, when I attend 'VP' with my vacuum flask/banana/biscuit is where do all the people I see get their money from to afford drinks/burgers/frank furters/pies/having a bet/replica shirt etc. There seem plenty of those kind of fans around. And I wonder how many of the 6000 really are in financial difficulties. Some will be but perhaps they could be given a discount if they proved they were unemployed/on benefits etc. Isn't that a realistic way of dealing with that problem?

Your living in a dream world. . All these stupid calculations 10,000 x £100 simples. But it's not. . We get 10,000 but how many aren't paying adult prices? I bet at least 30-40% of all people who attend city are either free children under 11, discounted tickets at 12-16 or people over 65. . A dad takes his 2 kids, 1 adult ticket, 2 child tickets or freebies dependant on age. . So 10,000 x £100 doesn't work it's not realisitic. . Put everyones ticket up by £100 and this dad has to pay £300 more for the status quo. . As for discounts for unemployed. If your unemployed you should focus your resourses elsewhere not on attending football games.

Boy you talk some tripe,i got six season tickets last year and stumped up around 800 quid,we'd still have around 10,000 fans if the club put the price of tickets up within reason imo.You make it sound like our hardcoresupport is reliant on freebies and givaway tickets prices,can i have some as i seem to be digging deep into my pocket to but season tickets.BCFC are actually down to their hardcore support now,Maccas quote of 4,000 is just plain wrong.CTID

bcfc1903 wrote:

Thee Voice of Reason wrote:

Cityman23 wrote:

Thee Voice of Reason wrote:

Cityman23 wrote: PS: If 10,000 fans stayed as season ticket holders paying £250 a year (extra £100), this would bring in an extra 10,000x 100 =£1 million !! This would cover the rent, without any money now in the City 'coffers' being used at all! Perhaps we wouldn't even be having this discussion!!

Because money doesn't grow on trees and many can't afford another £100 per year because at those figures you include children too who as it stands are free or very cheap.

To 'Thee Voice Of Reason' The truth is what I've already stated that many fans now see the current £150 not as a discount offer but as the 'true' value of a ticket and that's why we have problems (in increasing it). So it means then that (following your reasoning) many want to follow a professional football team (and they can't follow any others I know in the West Yorks. area at that price) at an unrealistically low price. ie one where costs can't be met/players are poor (because that's all we can get) we never can expect promotion and go down/down and finally out of existence altogether. What I often wonder, when I attend 'VP' with my vacuum flask/banana/biscuit is where do all the people I see get their money from to afford drinks/burgers/frank furters/pies/having a bet/replica shirt etc. There seem plenty of those kind of fans around. And I wonder how many of the 6000 really are in financial difficulties. Some will be but perhaps they could be given a discount if they proved they were unemployed/on benefits etc. Isn't that a realistic way of dealing with that problem?

Your living in a dream world. . All these stupid calculations 10,000 x £100 simples. But it's not. . We get 10,000 but how many aren't paying adult prices? I bet at least 30-40% of all people who attend city are either free children under 11, discounted tickets at 12-16 or people over 65. . A dad takes his 2 kids, 1 adult ticket, 2 child tickets or freebies dependant on age. . So 10,000 x £100 doesn't work it's not realisitic. . Put everyones ticket up by £100 and this dad has to pay £300 more for the status quo. . As for discounts for unemployed. If your unemployed you should focus your resourses elsewhere not on attending football games.

Boy you talk some tripe,i got six season tickets last year and stumped up around 800 quid,we'd still have around 10,000 fans if the club put the price of tickets up within reason imo.You make it sound like our hardcoresupport is reliant on freebies and givaway tickets prices,can i have some as i seem to be digging deep into my pocket to but season tickets.BCFC are actually down to their hardcore support now,Maccas quote of 4,000 is just plain wrong.CTID

I would say City's hardcore support is about 6000-7000 realistically.
.
The cheaper season tickets bring in another 3000 I would say.
.
Increase tickets and we would still see about 6000-7000 season ticket holder.
.
The proof is in the number who turn up for the tuesdat games this season like Chesterfield and Rotherham.

I'm glad we are SLOWLY getting to a point where people don't just snipe at one another. Believe it or not, the comments above seem well-measured from what we've seen in the past.

To my fellow Bulls fans who claim Bradford is an Rugby city you are talking utter, utter rubbish. We have just about the lowest number of amateur clubs of any town in the region.

I'd love City to come to Odsal and I wish them well. My only wish is for every sports fan in teh city to unite behind their sister club like they manage in Leeds. If you live in Leeds you love your club whether its RL or football.

I remember a good few years ago, some nice house on Midland Road were blighted because BCFC encouraged by the goons at the T&A developed the ground to premier league standard. Everyone was living in cloud cuckoo land. BCFC can NEVER be a solid professional team because the game is totally corrupt. So long as you plonkers keep paying you Sky Sport subscriptions then Man U, Arsenal and Chelsea will be UK professional football and the rest consigned to the scrap heap. Be careful what you wish for.

4-0

F**k me sideways till Sunday!!

Thee Voice of Reason wrote:

bcfc1903 wrote:

Thee Voice of Reason wrote:

Cityman23 wrote:

Thee Voice of Reason wrote:

Cityman23 wrote: PS: If 10,000 fans stayed as season ticket holders paying £250 a year (extra £100), this would bring in an extra 10,000x 100 =£1 million !! This would cover the rent, without any money now in the City 'coffers' being used at all! Perhaps we wouldn't even be having this discussion!!

Because money doesn't grow on trees and many can't afford another £100 per year because at those figures you include children too who as it stands are free or very cheap.

To 'Thee Voice Of Reason' The truth is what I've already stated that many fans now see the current £150 not as a discount offer but as the 'true' value of a ticket and that's why we have problems (in increasing it). So it means then that (following your reasoning) many want to follow a professional football team (and they can't follow any others I know in the West Yorks. area at that price) at an unrealistically low price. ie one where costs can't be met/players are poor (because that's all we can get) we never can expect promotion and go down/down and finally out of existence altogether. What I often wonder, when I attend 'VP' with my vacuum flask/banana/biscuit is where do all the people I see get their money from to afford drinks/burgers/frank furters/pies/having a bet/replica shirt etc. There seem plenty of those kind of fans around. And I wonder how many of the 6000 really are in financial difficulties. Some will be but perhaps they could be given a discount if they proved they were unemployed/on benefits etc. Isn't that a realistic way of dealing with that problem?

Your living in a dream world. . All these stupid calculations 10,000 x £100 simples. But it's not. . We get 10,000 but how many aren't paying adult prices? I bet at least 30-40% of all people who attend city are either free children under 11, discounted tickets at 12-16 or people over 65. . A dad takes his 2 kids, 1 adult ticket, 2 child tickets or freebies dependant on age. . So 10,000 x £100 doesn't work it's not realisitic. . Put everyones ticket up by £100 and this dad has to pay £300 more for the status quo. . As for discounts for unemployed. If your unemployed you should focus your resourses elsewhere not on attending football games.

Boy you talk some tripe,i got six season tickets last year and stumped up around 800 quid,we'd still have around 10,000 fans if the club put the price of tickets up within reason imo.You make it sound like our hardcoresupport is reliant on freebies and givaway tickets prices,can i have some as i seem to be digging deep into my pocket to but season tickets.BCFC are actually down to their hardcore support now,Maccas quote of 4,000 is just plain wrong.CTID

I would say City's hardcore support is about 6000-7000 realistically.
.
The cheaper season tickets bring in another 3000 I would say.
.
Increase tickets and we would still see about 6000-7000 season ticket holder.
.
The proof is in the number who turn up for the tuesdat games this season like Chesterfield and Rotherham.

My post of around 4000 fans was full adult paying fans, not kids freebies or pensioners concessions. I think if you look back on the figures from our last season in league one you will find these add up and so are not wrong. The board have said that as long as we hit ten thousand season tickets then the cheap tickets are viable. If not they have to end it. Remember we only sold 6000 cheap tickets last season and the others bought at an increased price. I still think if ticket prices were increased we would lose some fans and financially not be any better off but time will prove that. Why say I'm wrong when this is what the board have consistently said themselves.

shaggoth, the reference to bradford being a rugby town is based on ATTENDANCES at matches. you have only to look back over the years, to see that is the case. not on the number of amateur teams in the city. if the number of teams is the guideline then bradford city should be in the higher divisions.
**
if, as i believe, you will disagree and quote various figures re gates at both vp and odsal, over recent years, to prove me wrong. but bear in mind i am talking about a period covering some 8 decades.

By gum it doesnt take much to get some of you people wound up.At the end of the day I expect two things to happen City will stay at Valley Parade and they wont get relegated.Either way I couldnt care less,I used to love football almost as much as Rugby League but I am afraid its no longer the game I grew up with during the Second World War.Its all about money and thats about it,football players used to play with pride and the ultimate aim was to play for your home town team and if not support them.In my case it was Park Avenue and I could never support any other,I divided my time between Northern and Park Avenue,but for some time now its only Rugby League I follow.I dont wish City any harm but I could never go watch them.The only times I went to Valley Parade was to watch Avenue and when the Bulls played there.The fact is that Bradford has always been, in my time,a Rugby League town,the combined ground records for City and Avenue was never any where near the 69,000+ Northern had for a cup game in 1953 so thats the end of that argument.The only ground share that works is the KC in Hull because it was built for that purpose and was financed from the sale of Hulls telephone company.Unless a similar situation occurs in Bradford I cant see it working.Bulls fans like Odsal and City fans prefer Valley Parade and that is a fact.

So if there is was a game of Kabbadi held in the City, and it attracted a crowd of 100,000, would that mean Bradford became a Kabbadi town?

Who cares how many fans watched 1 cup game in 1953?

This is 2011 and a decade ago, we had a Football team in the top league and a Rugby team winning all the major league honours.

Stop this pathetic rivalry between the two, get the Odsal Super Stadium built that is fit for Rugby, Football, concerts and Kabbadi if need be. I'd love to see Stock Cars and Speedway return too, seen as World Finals were held at Odsal not long back. Though I appreciate it wouldn't be great for pitch.

Let's actually get behind this City.

City should have moved to Odsal years ago and joined forces with the Bulls, the College and the Council to build a Sporting Village fit for both clubs and the people of the district.

Lets all support it now!

Thee Voice of Reason wrote:

bcfc1903 wrote:

Thee Voice of Reason wrote:

Cityman23 wrote:

Thee Voice of Reason wrote:

Cityman23 wrote: PS: If 10,000 fans stayed as season ticket holders paying £250 a year (extra £100), this would bring in an extra 10,000x 100 =£1 million !! This would cover the rent, without any money now in the City 'coffers' being used at all! Perhaps we wouldn't even be having this discussion!!

Because money doesn't grow on trees and many can't afford another £100 per year because at those figures you include children too who as it stands are free or very cheap.

To 'Thee Voice Of Reason' The truth is what I've already stated that many fans now see the current £150 not as a discount offer but as the 'true' value of a ticket and that's why we have problems (in increasing it). So it means then that (following your reasoning) many want to follow a professional football team (and they can't follow any others I know in the West Yorks. area at that price) at an unrealistically low price. ie one where costs can't be met/players are poor (because that's all we can get) we never can expect promotion and go down/down and finally out of existence altogether. What I often wonder, when I attend 'VP' with my vacuum flask/banana/biscuit is where do all the people I see get their money from to afford drinks/burgers/frank furters/pies/having a bet/replica shirt etc. There seem plenty of those kind of fans around. And I wonder how many of the 6000 really are in financial difficulties. Some will be but perhaps they could be given a discount if they proved they were unemployed/on benefits etc. Isn't that a realistic way of dealing with that problem?

Your living in a dream world. . All these stupid calculations 10,000 x £100 simples. But it's not. . We get 10,000 but how many aren't paying adult prices? I bet at least 30-40% of all people who attend city are either free children under 11, discounted tickets at 12-16 or people over 65. . A dad takes his 2 kids, 1 adult ticket, 2 child tickets or freebies dependant on age. . So 10,000 x £100 doesn't work it's not realisitic. . Put everyones ticket up by £100 and this dad has to pay £300 more for the status quo. . As for discounts for unemployed. If your unemployed you should focus your resourses elsewhere not on attending football games.

Boy you talk some tripe,i got six season tickets last year and stumped up around 800 quid,we'd still have around 10,000 fans if the club put the price of tickets up within reason imo.You make it sound like our hardcoresupport is reliant on freebies and givaway tickets prices,can i have some as i seem to be digging deep into my pocket to but season tickets.BCFC are actually down to their hardcore support now,Maccas quote of 4,000 is just plain wrong.CTID

I would say City's hardcore support is about 6000-7000 realistically. . The cheaper season tickets bring in another 3000 I would say. . Increase tickets and we would still see about 6000-7000 season ticket holder. . The proof is in the number who turn up for the tuesdat games this season like Chesterfield and Rotherham.

Our hardcore support is around 10,000,do you really think these people are turning up to watch entertaining football,i believe we've kept that from the cheap tickets originally priced and also the increased interest in BCFC from our rise to the premiership.It'll take many more years of dross to reduce it to the levels you mention.CTID

macca1969 wrote:

Thee Voice of Reason wrote:

bcfc1903 wrote:

Thee Voice of Reason wrote:

Cityman23 wrote:

Thee Voice of Reason wrote:

Cityman23 wrote: PS: If 10,000 fans stayed as season ticket holders paying £250 a year (extra £100), this would bring in an extra 10,000x 100 =£1 million !! This would cover the rent, without any money now in the City 'coffers' being used at all! Perhaps we wouldn't even be having this discussion!!

Because money doesn't grow on trees and many can't afford another £100 per year because at those figures you include children too who as it stands are free or very cheap.

To 'Thee Voice Of Reason' The truth is what I've already stated that many fans now see the current £150 not as a discount offer but as the 'true' value of a ticket and that's why we have problems (in increasing it). So it means then that (following your reasoning) many want to follow a professional football team (and they can't follow any others I know in the West Yorks. area at that price) at an unrealistically low price. ie one where costs can't be met/players are poor (because that's all we can get) we never can expect promotion and go down/down and finally out of existence altogether. What I often wonder, when I attend 'VP' with my vacuum flask/banana/biscuit is where do all the people I see get their money from to afford drinks/burgers/frank furters/pies/having a bet/replica shirt etc. There seem plenty of those kind of fans around. And I wonder how many of the 6000 really are in financial difficulties. Some will be but perhaps they could be given a discount if they proved they were unemployed/on benefits etc. Isn't that a realistic way of dealing with that problem?

Your living in a dream world. . All these stupid calculations 10,000 x £100 simples. But it's not. . We get 10,000 but how many aren't paying adult prices? I bet at least 30-40% of all people who attend city are either free children under 11, discounted tickets at 12-16 or people over 65. . A dad takes his 2 kids, 1 adult ticket, 2 child tickets or freebies dependant on age. . So 10,000 x £100 doesn't work it's not realisitic. . Put everyones ticket up by £100 and this dad has to pay £300 more for the status quo. . As for discounts for unemployed. If your unemployed you should focus your resourses elsewhere not on attending football games.

Boy you talk some tripe,i got six season tickets last year and stumped up around 800 quid,we'd still have around 10,000 fans if the club put the price of tickets up within reason imo.You make it sound like our hardcoresupport is reliant on freebies and givaway tickets prices,can i have some as i seem to be digging deep into my pocket to but season tickets.BCFC are actually down to their hardcore support now,Maccas quote of 4,000 is just plain wrong.CTID

I would say City's hardcore support is about 6000-7000 realistically. . The cheaper season tickets bring in another 3000 I would say. . Increase tickets and we would still see about 6000-7000 season ticket holder. . The proof is in the number who turn up for the tuesdat games this season like Chesterfield and Rotherham.

My post of around 4000 fans was full adult paying fans, not kids freebies or pensioners concessions. I think if you look back on the figures from our last season in league one you will find these add up and so are not wrong. The board have said that as long as we hit ten thousand season tickets then the cheap tickets are viable. If not they have to end it. Remember we only sold 6000 cheap tickets last season and the others bought at an increased price. I still think if ticket prices were increased we would lose some fans and financially not be any better off but time will prove that. Why say I'm wrong when this is what the board have consistently said themselves.

I think you'll find our full adult season ticket take up is far more than 4,000,i'd say 6 to 7,000,the freebies i believe are under 11's,obviously you then get the other concessions you mentioned.I wouldn't expect much fall off in season ticket uptake if the prices are raised sensibly.I still believe BCFC have a hardcore of 10,000 with the possibility to double that if the club rise to Championship level.Even in this league,if City had a season like Chesterfield have had,they would be pulling in massive crowds for the big games.I believe the full season ticket uptake was around 9,200,last season.CTID