Which stadium will get built first?

only liverpool will fill theirs . the other two for big games only.

Liverpool can't even fill old Anfield

Liverpool never, Chelsea when they`ve bought off everybody they need to and Spurs in the not too distant future.... about to start building the supermarket which is part of the overall scheme I believe.

comment by Colin The Cabbage (U1623)


posted 30 minutes ago

only liverpool will fill theirs . the other two for big games only.
--------------------------------------------------------------

Not keeping abreast of Liverpools current affairs over the last few years have we!

35 mill

Liverpool have had gates up to 10k under capacity while spurs and Chelsea sell out all prem games

Don't Chelsea need to buy the current ground back from the fans before they can move?
----------------------------------
The CPO will sign up to this (as would I) in a second IMO, the reason the club failed last time is because they weren't transparent enough by refusing to divulge where we would be moving to. This is as clear as day and we would still get to keep the manor that we have all grown up with and loved.

Olympic Stadium = I would cease to be a Chelsea fan.
Earls Court = Ideal but never going to happen.
Battersea Power Station =
White City = No
Cobham or Milton Keynes or some such place = I would also cease to be a Chelsea fan.

Any Club needs to preserve it's identity - This solution does that.

Why is earls impossible?

69, I feel the same as you over the Olympic Stadium, White City or anyother such location - to me if we moved to those locations we wouldn't have the right to call ourselves Chelsea Football Club any longer.

BPS or Earls Court I'd accept, but I'd grieve for Stamford Bridge, I love the place - it's like I've grown up there!

Brummie, I also wish it was possible to stay at the Bridge and achieve our goals, but realistically we're going to have to move. The irony is that if Mears had succeeded with his ambitions in 1972, when obtaining planning permissions were far easier, we would now have a 60,000 all seater stadium on the site of Stamford Bridge.

Robbies army

I believe the situation with regard to Earls Court was that it was only sold fairly recently and the current owners have lucrative plans for the site that don't include us. Persuading them to change course by offering alternative financial inducements would even be prohibitive for Roman Abramovich.