i doubt they'll schedule a game there though

For the sake of an addition 2k on the max capacity, I honestly don't see the problem.

There are probably only a few games a season that we could fill the ground to 20k, and it makes the ground a little less full for the rest - with potential decrease in atmosphere. If we get to the point where we're regularly selling the place out at 18k, then we should be in a pretty good financial state and future expansion becomes easier.

Better to worry about the extra few thousand places when we can demonstrate we're in a position to actually need them. When that time comes, our finances will be so much better (via lower maintenance on our ground, enhanced corporate facilities and higher average crowds) that we can seriously think about expanding the ground.

Yes, thats what the dire thought as well.

Why lie?

Because the Guardian has stopped printing his weekly rant complaining about the same thing.

Risky business what Saints are doing in this economic climate. Could end up like Oldham and Watersheddings.

Well, we didn't start it in this economic climate. The economic climate was all sunshine and warmth when this project got underway. In fact, the earth might have been a whole degree cooler too, it was that long ago.

We've got no choice but to keep on at it because if we don't leave KR soon, the place will fall down all by itself.

Surely if the Saints can achieve our dream of a new stadium in the depth of the worst recession in years, when all about are going to the wall, show's how strong the Saints brand is.
The only risk to our future, was not trying to get a new stadium in the first place, that was made quiet plain by the RFL.

I have noticed nothing but constant doom mongering from you over this new ground...

If it's not Warrington related, historically he's negative.

and correct.

Just as a matter of interest and no doubt it'll become clear in February,but back in August Tony Colquitt said in an interview that the stadium would have around 12,500 seats with the rest standing.According to the plans on the council website they show 10,245 seats,139 disabled with 7,600 standing.Obviously an increase of 2000+ seats there-can anyone shed any light on this or is it simply the original seating/standing ratios were not set in stone?

Serious question after seeing the link to the planning permission on the redvee forum (not doom-mongering - although there is plenty of fuel in the conditions to the planning permission if I so choose at a later date):-

Has the design of the stadium changed? The drawing numbers referred to in the planning permission are different to those that have been up-loaded onto the council planning portal (the ones on the portal have not been updated for a couple of years at least looking at the revisions which is very unusual).

I guess the real good news is that detailed planning has been given and a section 106 agreement has been signed by Langtree however it is interesting to read that although there is a definition for "Tenant Enhancements" included in the agreements the term never appears to have been used. I guessed that the "Owner" was able to negotiate out of any obligation to provide anything more than "Super League Standard".