Why are stadiums so expensive to build? 

Crazy asf 😅

So true😂

Agreed

Christopher Lee was great in the Star Wars movies.

Yeah it had me baffled too.

He should make a video about the rats playing EA FC 24.

​@@JamesBond77FIFA is already dead, the name change killed it.

lmaooooo @@JamesBond77

💪

Yup and if you’re quoting from a man from one of these firms; they are unlikely to add themselves into the cost mix.

@@MAC_ABCwhat do you mean by this?

@@saifbukhari53444:30 they use a quote from a guy who works at a company that builds stadiums. He talks about the costs but obviously doesn’t mention his company’s fee

Sainsbury's have Ibuprofen for £1!!!!!!! The staff must have thought I was insane stood there swearing at the shelf before I could get the composure to walk out and buy it for 39p in Heron 😂

Even damn plastic items are costing a fortune these days

​@kkgt6591 hello mate, opinion on clearlake capital selling captain gallagher. Opinion on striker we should bring in this January

@@meentage sell him, sell sterling too.

@@kkgt6591 lmao 🤣 sterling and maatsen can leave

Yeah but it's Birmingham. No one would go there, even for a football match at Wembley.

@@janermaher your statement makes no sense … a national stadium is a national stadium lad … being in Birmingham makes it more accessible too ..

In respect of Tottenham Stadium, the £1bn figure actually represents the fully capitalised costs attributed to the Northumberland Development Project (NDP) This describes a 3 Phase programme of works, involving: Club office, retail and college (1), Stadium and public realm (2) and residential and hotel (3). Within that £1bn, the actual build cost for the stadium is probably around £5-600m. This compares with the quoted £350m cost of the original (KSS, I think?) design which was of a similar footprint but was around 55k and didn’t involve a removable pitch. It is quite reasonable to assume the additional engineering added £150-200m to the eventually built design. In respect of the land requirement, it is my understanding that THFC acquired parcels over 20yrs and also capitalised this into the mix (again, standard procedure) They stand to make a fortune should they ever progress with Phase 3 (residential / hotel) and sell the units. The last I saw, they’d made some recent changes to the planning application but it’s broadly the same scheme - so the commitment remains. It’s a very interesting project.

@@imconfused1237They do the same with SoFi Stadium, the $6 billion figure includes the entire Hollywood Park development and the actual figure for the stadium is just over $2 billion.

​@@timknott5856But does it? London might not be the most central of places, but it's probably the best connected - most of the major road and rail routes converge there, which makes it relatively easy for most of the country to get to

Agreed. I think people are afraid of that balance shifting and justifiably so but there’s always been guaranteed money in the game. What does bother me, and something I hadn’t thought about before is the NFL’s “pack up and move the team across the country” thing. Don’t like that one bit. Pretty sure I can rest easy knowing that fans would never allow anything like it in this sport. The day that a club in England moves for money is the day I stop watching the Prem

⁠​⁠@@isahamilton01it has happened before with the creation of MK Dons by moving Wimbledon fc

There is a distinction though. Fans feel less like customers when the 'club' feels more like a 'club' than a brand for its fans. Letting fans and members have a say in club matters definitely helps that dynamic be realised. The EPL has lost it, every fan is a transaction number to them.

@@aerochrise great point I had entirely forgotten about MK Dons 👀 I’ve got no interest in playing the morality card, I’d likely only allow it to get in my way of enjoying football if it’s directly related to my club or to our top competitors. Bit hypocritical tbh. Unfortunately I think most fans would feel the same and that’s the only thing holding the door open for these types of decisions to be made

I still don't get how fans in America are ok with that, like you live in your home city go watch your team in what ever sport take your kids enjoy yourself and then they say we're moving cities and you're supposed to say OK and move on

The fancy seats at Tottenham let's them come in even when there's no match so they can have drinks and bring guests in

Reminds me of when Atletico Madrid fans protested about Wi-Fi some years back.

Gotta post a photo at the stadium on social media. How else will people know you're there ?😊

Yeah, Mr Lee doesn't seem to be the most kosher individual.

Absolute facts here. You can't tell me, for example, St Louis didn't deserve to keep The Rams... but there's more money in Los Angeles so it didn't matter what happened. While I'm very American in wanting my sports to have salary caps and playoffs... I always envy the European model of teams being clubs and for the most part being forced to stay where they're from.

why dont fans boycott then? fans are dont care about the club nor the location, a day at the stadium for social media clout is all that matters.

@@ssccpl it wouldn’t have an effect. Ticket sales aren’t the main source of revenue. It’s like the Glazers at United, everything is so commercialized that even teams with the most obvious thing to protest (like a blatantly racist name) are pretty insulated from fan action. Additionally it’s a monopoly and a closed league. They control the entire market and they’re expanding it overseas, basketball in China and the NFL in Europe. They can always just shift markets. That’s what Stan Kroenke did with the Rams.

Don’t forget that they all need to use their stadium as something to show up the next stadium in line. When Jerry Jones built his stadium with the giant screens in the middle, everyone suddenly needed screens that can out-do that. Now all of a sudden, you’re seeing these giant wrap-around screens that wrap around the field. European billionaires aren’t immune from this, they want the shiny bells and whistles too.

That's mental if all things considered. Imagine taking same loan as Spurs right now and repaying same amount 2.5 times more. Levy masterclass truly what he built before anyone could imagine.

Yeah Daniel Levy IS a financial genius. He takes a lot of flak for how he runs the footballing side, but there’s better CEO than him in the Premier League. £600m at 2.6% = roughly £15m per annum to service the interest. That is peanuts to a business turning over £450m a year! Their commercial numbers are insane.

@@imconfused1237 Levy micromanages every single transfer till last penny, there's no way he doesnt care about giving 15m annum interest to banks.

⁠@@edenhazard27512.6% represents VERY cheap debt! Levy’s used that to build a cash cow. £15m is peanuts when the ROI is 5x

What's wrong with refinancing at 2.6%? Are you saying it's a good thing or bad thing?

Which makes it all the crazier how Barcelona burned through all that money and are in so much debt with little to show for it.

like spurs with the bale money @@magivkmeister6166

@@magivkmeister6166 everyone knows what the problem is and it's not debts. Even Barca fans know - and they're usually deluded.

@@rickenfataniaI’m probably being dense, but I thought debts was a huge problem for Barca. What is the problem?

@@alexthomas2067 the board. Debts are just a symptom of this and only the tip of the iceberg. It's not actually a problem inofitself nor is it unique to them. Look at Monaco, Borussia Dortmund, Arsenal, Atletico Madrid, Tottenham, Porto and Ajax since the turn of the century. All are debt free, can't keep any world class players and all have empty trophy cabinets (besides a few obscure domestic cups here and there). They're essentially practise teams (like Real B). Even if they make (then loose) the odd CL final or mount a title charge. Porto are the only team on that list to win it this century and they beat Monaco. ...tbf to Barca, there was only one replacement in world football after Neymar left - and he joined him at PSG. Barca's on field problems started when MSN disbanded and they couldn't compete with their yardstick - Real Madrid - anymore. Real went from strength to strength whilst transitioning managers back and forth. United went from 1st to 7th after SAF retired. Real won 3 CLs in a row after replacing Mourinho and Ancelotti. Post Neymar, the added pressure on an aging Suarez and Messi (along with some counter-intuitive signings) lead to their downfall on the pitch. Barca simply backed the wrong horse. Neymar was Messi's heir, just like Messi took over from Eto'o/ Ronaldinho. Then Mbappe/ Neymar at PSG. Imo Bellingham and Vinicius have already overtaken Mbappe. He's not even competing with Kane or Haaland and last season he lost out to a mid 30s Benzema (in the Ballon D'or voting). If Barca had kept MSN together, Mbappe would have most likely joined Barca - not PSG or RM. And they'd still be competitive. MSN might have been and gone by now, but their ability to attract the best players would have remained and Real wouldn't have had all that dominance. The momentum has shifted, they won't catch Real now for a decade if they're lucky - if Real drop the ball. They've lost their ability to attract and chastise the best players in the world in the cult of La Masia. They haven't got the reputation or the manager to attract world class talent anymore. When we were in the play ground as kids if one team was thrashing another we'd stop the match, reselect teams and start again. If PSG and Barca did that 5 years ago both their problems on the field would be solved but commerce has ruined the game and will continue to do so as long as we consume.

Billion dollar stadium, and yet, you can fit all the contents of the trophy cabinet in a shoebox...

@@marcileiseth1500 Spurs just like to give other teams a chance. Imagine how big a club they would be if they won trophies on a regular basis. It wouldn't be fair on the rest.

Is that you Glazers?

@@kw8263 I wish lol.

But that's the American system. "Build me a new stadium with all the gadgets, whistles and bells or I go elsewhere. And remember that City B and City C will build it and I won't have to pay one cent!!" That and the promises that construction of said stadium will "pay for itself" X number of years. Six years later, that new stadium doesn't have enough corporate suites. Cities that host minor league baseball go through this every two or four years (the length of a development contract). Mind that most of these cities barely have 5000 in population for a 8500-seat stadium and at the bottom of hierarchical structure!! 😕

Calm yourself. Caicedo has been at Chelsea for 4 months, and isn't even 22. But Brighton's stadium costing less than his transfer fee is ridiculous

Hey for Brighton doesn't effect them they got a huge pay day

Good luck for the future!

yeah, they seem to be doing that more often lately

By better stadium you mean renovating our Home what we need is to fix our roof and a slight expansion plan that was featured in a video that will keep within the current style of old Trafford yes this will mean our stadium will be closed for a few years but we've done it before back in ww2 when much of Old Trafford was decimated by the Luftwaffe we played at Maine Road for a few seasons can definitely do that again with the Etihad

Jews☕

And forgotten the salaries of the different Special Assistants assigned to the project which is needed when the CEO has to cut the ribbon....

Our new stadium is amazing, but I think I speak for most spurs fans when I say we miss White Hart Lane. There's something so special about old English grounds.

From a united fan I find it a travesty destroying historic stadiums we've already lost white heart Lane Highbury Upton Park and soon Goodison Park will be pulled down as well And with how badly our owners have neglected Old Trafford I fear its time is limited as well

The generation that knee WHL would soon pass away. The new stadium will serve generations to come for another 100 years. Let's not just think of ourselves. I prefer to look at it in a philosophical way. The old girl transformed with a new majestical body, fit enough for another 100 years.. The club never left their spiritual home. It just transformed...

@@kurtpunchesthings2411 I feel bad for West Ham, they didn't even get a nice new stadium like Bramley Moore Docks, it's a shame they're stuck in that bowl

Granted, sufficient infrastructure like electricity, water and amenities are needed for fan experience, though yeah most are pushing either to empty the wallet, or to instead the more well off fans or tourists.

@@bryanngdawei3282 I have to own up to having invited for the first time ever to a box a couple of weeks back,prematch drinks,food etc and as soon as I win the lottery I'm getting my own and screw the plebs.

City did try to buy it. The lease was worth more to the local council than the stadium itself

Because people want to watch mbappe, messi, Neymar, etc etc

Probably big 'match day clients' from Qatar

a high percentage of parc des princes are vip hospitality to make the most out of the vast amount of business associates and rich tourists in paris, the hospitality packages make more revenue than all other normal seating.

relative to a decade ago? yes. it's like saying spurs stadium is cheap because in 10 years time it would cost 2billion... which is a possibility.

"what are other big markets aside from London?" is that a serious question? Manchester and Liverpool are the obvious markets. The question isn't if those cities could fill two 60000+ stadiums for Prem teams. It's just if the ticket price would be high enough to justify it.

I'm convinced that you're undervaluing the impact of football in european countries, but especially in the UK. I believe that London could have 7 or 8 60K+ stadiums with hospitality and they'd all have a healthy fan base attending games. Arsenal, Tottenham, Chelsea, West Ham, Crystal Palace, Brentford, Fulham... There's already 7 London teams in the Premier League as it is. That city can sustain that. And I didn't even mention QPR, Charlton Athletic or Millwall that might one day make it there too (again or for the first time).

⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠@@mnm1273yes, I don’t consider them to be big markets. Medium markets at best. Manchester City couldn’t even fill out their 48,000 seaters on a daily basis even tho they’re the best teams in the world. If Manchester only has 1 team then ok they could pack 70k seaters fine, but still doesn’t make it a big market like London. Liverpool also is not rich. Not even an economic wonder in the UK. These cities are not growing and some are even declining. The UK can’t simply afford like the US bc thats a ridiculously vast country. If we compare these clubs to college teams rather than pro sport teams in terms of the support then I can get the perspectives. A lot of college towns can fill 90k seaters even tho the market is not huge by any means. College teams are also bound to their communities like soccer clubs in Europe. If goes by that then yes, Manchester and Liverpool can do fine with large seaters. But, u simply get less money out of hospitality bc in reality despite being smaller, NFL stadiums make more than college stadiums. Premier League is different tho bc its popular worldwide and there’s that big consumer base from South Asia that will spend money whenever they visit the UK.

⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠@@Mebsutau can stop at Arsenal Tottenham Chelsea and West Ham. Like I said, not even LA or NY can afford vast land resources for these constructions. Some NFL cities even regret building oversized stadiums so hoping EFL teams to get the same seaters is very unrealistic. The consumer base here is more willing to spend than in Europe and thats a fact. Everyone is complaining about ticket prices in soccer nowadays. These I highly doubt will spend much towards hospitality. This is the equivalent of college football fans in the US than NFL fans. Sure, a lot of college football stadiums are way bigger than NFL stadiums, but a lot of them don’t have great hospitality bc they know they’re a school and cant expand their fan base the way a pro sport team does. As the result, NFL stadiums make more money with less seats but better hospitality. I agree European clubs can reach a wider audience, but 1) in a crowded market and 2) with a weaker consumer base, most Premier League and EFL Championship clubs dont need NFL-size venues. Unlike NFL teams, most of these clubs are heavily in-debt already. MLS-size venues are by far the better options. Some of these venues already offered better wifi than Old Trafford or Emirates Stadium for example.

@@HungNguyen-qr7bt "Manchester City couldn’t even fill out their 48,000 seaters on a daily basis" This season Man City have averaged 52000 in attendance. Closer to 53000 if we only include league games (European games are the only real cases where City struggles to fill seats). They fill their stadium. 60000+ is only a 20% increase, given that City ticket costs are high increasing attendance would be simple. That's how the MLB has such high attendances, average ticket prices are lower.