Today, we’re trying
something a little bit different. Just to explain, as everyone who cares about
these things knows, on Friday 2nd March 2012 Chelsea FC released a fascinating
report called The Future of Stamford Bridge (FSB)
which focused on the efforts the club had made over the past eight years to
expand the stadium and which also explained just how difficult all the
available options are. At the time, CFCTruth welcomed the statement and praised
its clarity and its openness in laying out the specific difficulties of
expanding the Bridge.
Amongst a wealth
of other useful information, the club’s document contains a very detailed
breakdown of the specific costs associated with expanding Stamford Bridge to a
55,000 stadium (through the enlargement of the Matthew Harding Stand and the
Shed End). But while the FSB referred to the costs
of building a 60,000 stadium at Stamford Bridge (“in excess of £600 million”
apparently) it did not provide a
similarly detailed cost breakdown for this option and certainly did not even hint
at the what the comparative costs of Chelsea FC moving to a new stadium might
be.
But CFCTruth is
convinced that trying to understand these comparative costs is a key part of
the debate over the future of Stamford Bridge. And so we have spent our time
since the publication of the FSB examining the financial estimates included in the statement and
have used this data, along with the best information we could find from
elsewhere, to make informed estimates of the potential cost of Chelsea’s
various alternative stadium options.
So this is what
we have done. For this exercise, we have assumed that all the associated
logistical and planning issues can be overcome (big assumptions but necessary
in this case). And as these costs could vary dramatically depending on
different factors, we have chosen to present the ‘best case’, ‘worst case’ and
median estimates for each option. The comparison between the estimates for each
different option is fascinating. Later pieces will look at what Chelsea can earn from a new stadium at SB - we must try to factor in the compressed nature of any stadium there and how many of the additional revenue drivers can be included in a redeveloped SB.
Stamford Bridge Extended to a 55,000
Capacity Stadium (using the club’s figures)
|
|||
MHS
|
Shed End
|
Total
|
|
Total Project Income
|
£0m
|
£0m
|
£0m
|
Total Project
Expenditure
|
£177m
|
£98m
|
£275m
|
Net Total
Expenditure
|
£177m
|
£98m
|
£275m
|
Stamford Bridge Rebuilt to a 60,000
Capacity Stadium
|
|||
Best Case
|
Worst Case
|
Median
|
|
Total Project
Income
|
£0m
|
£0m
|
£0m
|
Total Project
Expenditure
|
£561m
|
£877m
|
£719m
|
Net Total
Expenditure
|
£561m
|
£877m
|
£719m
|
New 60,000 Capacity Stadium Built at
Battersea
|
|||
Best Case
|
Worst Case
|
Median
|
|
Total Project
Income
|
£862m
|
£542m
|
£702m
|
Total Project
Expenditure
|
£864m
|
£1,489m
|
£1,177m
|
Net Total
Expenditure
|
£2m
|
£947m
|
£474m
|
New 60,000 Capacity Stadium Built at
Earls Court
|
|||
Best Case
|
Worst Case
|
Median
|
|
Total Project
Income
|
£667m
|
£208m
|
£438m
|
Total Project
Expenditure
|
£647m
|
£1,146m
|
£897m
|
Net Total
Expenditure
|
£20m profit
|
£938m
|
£459m
|
Two things stick
out for us when looking at these figures. If we take the median estimates as a
rough yardstick, building a 60,000 stadium at Stamford Bridge looks to be much more expensive than building one
elsewhere. Even if you take the 'Best Case' figure for the Stamford Bridge option
this is £90m-£100m more expensive than even the median estimates for either
Earls Court or Battersea.
What also struck
us was that despite the protestations from certain quarters that the CPO offer
was just a 'land grab' and a scam so that Roman could 'claw back the money that
he has put into the club', selling Stamford Bridge and building elsewhere
really does not make Roman or the club any significant profit at all. What it
could do, however, is to greatly subsidise the cost of building a new stadium
in another location by bringing down the potentially huge costs to something
more manageable.
Why give these
figures any credence? That is a fair question. But these are not just figures
plucked out of the air. If you click on this link you will be able to
examine the estimates we have come up with for yourselves with along with explanations of how
and why we came up with the figures we did in the relevant comments section.
However, it is important to note that we are in no way suggesting that these
figures are the last word on the issue or that they have been somehow leaked to
us by the club. The figures are, as we quite openly admit, estimates (albeit relatively
educated ones). For that reason, we would like to invite all interested parties
and especially those people with expertise in the field of quantity surveying
and large-scale developments to help us improve the accuracy of the figures.
The cells in the spreadsheet that are highlighted in green are the ones we feel
need the most attention but you may know better...
Just to be
clear, we are not trying to advance any particular agenda here - you know our
position on the stadium and CPO issues but with these financial estimates our
sole intention is to try to capture a reasonably accurate picture of the
financial costs associated with each of the various stadium options which might
be available to the club. And by
sharing these figures to try to move the debate forwards.
So please take a look at the
spreadsheet, read the estimates carefully and then tell us what you think via cfctruth@gmail.com. And where we can, we will use the information you
provide to improve the quality of the estimates.
Next: In Part Two of this
article we will seek to analyse what the different estimates tell us about the
financial viability of each of Chelsea FC’s various stadium options.
No comments:
Post a Comment