I think it says either on the club site or Insider's reply on ask the club that we'll be able to start in December because the first bit that needs to be done is to the road - and that's all been approved and everything and won't change. Presumably the actual stadium then was never actually...
There's one quote from Martin Perry. Do you not think with news of this apparent magnitude, that the club should maybe try and tell the fans rather than them having to hear through the local paper and getting rather concerned as a result?
One also assumes that if the costs are rising, the number of people in the ground every week has to increase for the club to break even on the debt. If I remember rightly the original figure was 12,000, so what might it be now? Working on the basis that £40million's become £60m, it would mean...
Hmmm, we only have outline permission when building's supposed to start in three months and according to the original timescale was to start imminently?
I think the worry is more that they now have some ammunition to slow the whole process down again. And - solely over the issue of this redesign and the fact permission was granted for something completely different - I have to say I can see their point if they do decide to kick up a fuss about it.
The silence from the club is a bit deafening here. Shit like this should come from them first, not the Argus. I fail to see ANY WAY that this can be spun as good or even 'not serious' news.
Well quite, but you know what these people are like. After all it's not like the plans for what they've been told will be built have just been completely changed overnight.
Exactly. We've been given permission for the stadium in its original form. Surely this new, huge design requires new permission, and allows all the old objectors to come out of the woodwork again?
Agreed - it sounds crap and also surely the blending in with the environment was a HUGE factor in us being to build it where we are. This doesn't look good at all.