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

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

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

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

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

Very much agree with this, our first Wembley final has come at a very good time. It will take a brave council to be seen as anything other than supportive the week after the final.

Not only that £3 million quid is a lot better than nothing, I would like to see the council agree but put some sort of timescale on work starting.

It could work a number of ways:

The council might feel that they can't **** all over the feel good factor of Wembley.

Potential retailers might wet themselves thinking about 20-odd thousand people into Fossetts Farm every other Saturday during the winter.

The council might decide it can't allow SUFC a new stadium that holds 22,000 people because Wembley may prove we could actually fill it. The last thing the council want is 20-odd thousand people in a footy stadium on a Saturday afternoon when they could be in the town centre spending money.

(In case anyone hasn't worked it out, the last one is tongue in cheek.)
 
Why would the council say yes .It would mean extra Employment for the area they would recoup millions for nothing .To regenerate an area that is already dead .its a no brainer but this is the council NO BRAINS to start with .
 
Its a no brainer.
"Let us bring in new investment and regenerate the town your are charged with looking after, as well a regular large influx of people who may make a weekend of it or otherwise spend a few quid in your shops, sea front etc and promote the towns name on a national scale, oh and heres a few million for giving us the honour to do all this for you."
This will have little to no adverse affect on the town centre imho.
 
As I wrote before SUFC are so lucky that 30,000 approx. fans will be attending Wembley just 3 days before this important council meeting on the 10th. This highlights in councillors minds the importance of Southend United to the area. I think it will get the green light. Sainsburys would not have signed the joint letter if not fully committed.

Assuming that all those fans come from Southend?
 
The council might decide it can't allow SUFC a new stadium that holds 22,000 people because Wembley may prove we could actually fill it. The last thing the council want is 20-odd thousand people in a footy stadium on a Saturday afternoon when they could be in the town centre spending money.

Well I support SUFC and go to each home game, but I do not live in Southend. You can say that because of SUFC I am helping the prosperity of the town by buying myself and my son our chocolate bars and fish and chips, thus making the town a richer place. If it was not for our SUFC then I would spend my money in another town. So conclusion, we do need the new ground so we can all spend our money in Southend and make it a richer place as a result. :winking:
 
The more blokes at the footie, the more wife's and girlfriends shopping in town. Simples ;).
 
The council might decide it can't allow SUFC a new stadium that holds 22,000 people because Wembley may prove we could actually fill it. The last thing the council want is 20-odd thousand people in a footy stadium on a Saturday afternoon when they could be in the town centre spending money.

Well I support SUFC and go to each home game, but I do not live in Southend. You can say that because of SUFC I am helping the prosperity of the town by buying myself and my son our chocolate bars and fish and chips, thus making the town a richer place. If it was not for our SUFC then I would spend my money in another town. So conclusion, we do need the new ground so we can all spend our money in Southend and make it a richer place as a result. :winking:

Theres not a lot of logic to that argumentl. A successful football club is only good for the town. 20,000 people coming into the stadium creates revenue everywhere.

Highly unlikely we would get anywhere near that anyway unless we get to the premier league even with the great Wembley turnout.
 
I don't live locally and have never actually lived within the borough of Southend but heaven only knows how much I have put into the local economy during legendary pre and post-match sessions in the Spread or Railway!
 
Sainsburys and the club putting pressure on the council then - agree or lose a significant amount of investment......
 
It mentions that the original amount was a £6m "donation", so does that technically mean that he don't actually have to pay the council anything, but out of the "goodness" from Sainsburys (and Ron?) we are offering £3.5m?
 
Section 106 of the Town & Country Planning Act etc... is basically legalised bribery. We knew all the details of this "story" before Easter.

I think the council should have taken Cllr. Chris Walker's advice before Christmas (fine chap), to call Ron's bluff and let them build it but with a proviso that a date for commencement and substantial build out be met.
 
So what happens if the council say no???? does the whole Ron Martin house of cards come tumbling down taking sufc with it, if so how? correct me if i am wrong but wasnt a covenant put in place to say no sainsburys until SUFC have a new home. Will the club just be liquidated and ron still sell roots hall etc. Can anyone give a summary of the repercussions of a No vote
 
If they say no we will have to pay 6 million.

Really cant seem them saying no to be honest. 3.5 million is still a fair sum. (although as 1 million is based on a hotel being built that might be a pipe dream anyway).
 
If they say no we will have to pay 6 million.

Really cant seem them saying no to be honest. 3.5 million is still a fair sum. (although as 1 million is based on a hotel being built that might be a pipe dream anyway).

This is what makes me doubt it tbh, the IF factor, IF the hotel gets built, IF the main stand etc etc, the council would surely want some sort of guarantee.
 
This town has suffered a history of non progression and conservatism. Regeneration without risk has always been the mantra at the council and the new stadium is no different. Council may view the proposals as offering little in return for the local economy and that they might as well hold out for the full amount they want. Basildon anyone?
 
Back
Top