[url=http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/sport/9673392.___Quitting_Odsal_for_Valley_Parade_simply_has_to_happen_____says_MP/Telegraph & Argus[/url





Here we go again. I can't remember any prior pronouncements of any use to the club by the honourable member, yet out of the blue he's in the press sticking his oar in.

Why is this? Well, seemingly the cost of staying at odsal instead of goping to VP where, he tells us, "=#FF0000City were paying an “absolute fortune” in rent to Valley Parade landlord Gordon Gibb."

Eh? We need to go to VP because the landlord charges "an absolute fortune"? How does that work, Dave?

Or maybe Mr. Gibb, while charging City "an absolute fortune", would be happy for the Bulls to come but pay not one penny extra? Er, why would he do that?

Ward can butt out. We don't want to go to VP (overall) and we already have concrete proof that it is bad for our business so why would it be any different now?

I agree on the point about MPs being nowhere to be seen and then entering a debate with broad judgements but I do think the upkeep of two stadiums has to be brought into any discussion regarding the lack of competetiveness of the two clubs and what now appears to be a full decade of living on the financial precipice.

I take the point about the move to VP reducing crowds but of far greater significance to the long term reduction in crowds is the performances on the pitch. I've argued this has been due to poor decision making whilst you and others have made a strong case that it was due to the financial realities (probably a good measure of both).

I'm not arguing for a move to VP but do we need to start and discuss the future of the club in light of the OSV never happening?

Concur.

Note that in 2005 Caisley rightly drew attention to the underlying malaise of falling attendances, DESPITE good performances on the park. So I suspect there is a third factor at play regarding falling crowds, not just poor decisions or poor finances?

That MP should just keep his nose out we have bigger fish to fry at the moment

A million miles wider subject, attendances, but to cut it down (absurdly) to snippets:

First, whilst more successful clubs will obviously get bigger attendances, there is no direct line between your level of success and your crowds.

Second, rare people like Deakin "get" the package that you need, to attract crowds in bigger numbers. That is an art, being a winning team naturally helps but is only one factor. And it is not a formula. The general package that at any given time works for one club can be copied and used elsewhere, but it is a very moveable feast, you must constantly keep on top of the game and constantly reinvent your methods, and people like Deakin who instinctively are able to do this are rare as rocking horse droppings.

So, for example, our current matchday offerings are clearly based on the old Bullmania-days framework - yet despite clear and substantial cutbacks, that's not the point, the point is that much of the stuff is so dated, repetitive, cliched and boring and simply not an attraction any more.

But the things that persuade people to part with cash to go view a sporting event are many, varied, and largely inexplicable save to the Deakins of this world. Explain to me, for example why only 13.6K would attend at Wigan to see TGG played (v. Wakefield) when for comparable attractiveness of opposition, (Stoke) the struggling soccer team gets pushing 20K?

The Bulls as an enterprise are a franchise and could choose to play outside Bradford, but that would not be a good option for Bradford. VP is a non starter as a permanent ground, if an outside investor takes over the Club, they could take a very hard financial and pragmatic view that it would pay too relocate out the area. Administration may seem the worst option but it ain't

I would love to see someone specify the true costs of running Odsal. It seems to be the accepted wisdom that it costs a fortune but I've never seen any evidence of that.

I remember Caisley saying about 12 years ago that the club needed to urgently spend £10m on the ground, including a new roof on the main stand, to retain its safety certificate. I also remember the club mentioning a bill of £35k (?) to repair a drain. But I can't remember when I last saw any substantial work being carried out since the Coral Stand was built. The terraces aren't crumbling, nothing seems to be in imminent risk of falling down.

I had to smile a few months ago when Darlington FC nearly went bust and they attributed this to the very large costs of running their shiny new stadium. Apparently the fixed costs (heating, lighting etc) of modern stadia are very high.

im sure the RFL would just love losing the only paying tenant they have with probably no possibility of letting it to anyone else in the current financial climate. wouldnt the bulls have had to commit to stay there for a period anyway under the lease sale?
M.P.s who needs them anyway!

I understand why VP isn't the preferred option but not sure why it's a non starter. I agree with the other posters who draw attention to an unspecified 'x' factor that very often accompanies success but not quite always.

Considering we have very recently seen the real prospect of having Odsal but no Bradford Bulls, and Valley Parade but no Bradford City I think there must come a point where a discussion involving Bulls, City, Council, MPs, RFL is kick started from a position of ground zero i.e what has been spent already is now gone.

I want, a decent team, financially viable, in a good stadium capable of hosting international RL and semi finals etc, with good corporate, retail and admin facilities, with a long and secure tenure preferably from the Council and good car parking. How do we get there?

Would Bradford have the inclination/stomach for the legal fight to extract themselves from their curernt lease?

The only way that would be logical is if the facilities are used far more intensively.

Ultimately, the only way shared stadia really work is when BOTH clubs leave their existing grounds and a new ground is developed where they can start over as equal partners - see Wigan, Hull, Huddersfield etc

But what are the chances in the current economic climate? And if even someone came along waving a wad of cash, the traditionalists of both clubs would still fight it tooth and nail.