New Stadium

Which proposed stadium project do you prefer?


  • Total voters
    158

CafeCordoba

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Mar 7, 2004
Messages
35,623
Likes
15,155
Favorite Player
Toro, Barella
10 years of FIF
Regardless of the proposal, I do not think that renovating is a good idea. Despite the history, the Meazza is an old concrete jungle. And only focusing on the grass, as if everything else at the stadium is great is just wrong.

A purpose built, state of the art, new and modern stadium is the answer.
The point of the renovation is to improve the building. That's the definition of renovaation. :D

I think the way how city can keep at least one club in Meazza is to make an offer they cannot refuse. So good financially that they rather stay in Meazza.

That's basically what I'm hoping since as I've said before, I don't want us to leave that stadium. Too much history and magic to be left behind. Just do the renovation well enough by leveraging the position the club(s) have.
 

German_Interista

Capitano
Capitano
Joined
May 4, 2010
Messages
3,813
Likes
737
Favorite Player
Dimarco
10 years of FIF
We have to stop being nostalgic and move on. Bayern‘s Olympiastadion was historic too, but it was their best decision to move on. We will get used to the new place, renovation can’t fix everything respecticely building new will be a „rounder“ project
 

Capo

Prima Squadra
Prima Squadra
Joined
Apr 22, 2019
Messages
908
Likes
569
I think the way how city can keep at least one club in Meazza is to make an offer they cannot refuse. So good financially that they rather stay in Meazza.

This has to be the case - Too good for them to walk away from. But I doubt it.....

I assume it would be political suicide to use government funds to just keep a team in Milan. Especially when the whole world is dealing with real pressures on their pockets.
 

CafeCordoba

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Mar 7, 2004
Messages
35,623
Likes
15,155
Favorite Player
Toro, Barella
10 years of FIF
No one has mentioned anything about government funds. Only city's funds.
 

brehme1989

La Grande Inter
La Grande Inter
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
34,856
Likes
17,843
10 years of FIF
Nostradamus
Most Passionate Member
No one has mentioned anything about government funds. Only city's funds.
City is pretty much the government, no need to get picky just because there are a few bureaucratic layers that complicate the relationship.
 

CafeCordoba

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Mar 7, 2004
Messages
35,623
Likes
15,155
Favorite Player
Toro, Barella
10 years of FIF
Politicians from Milano who gets to decide needs to obviously use political capital if they want the state to use funds for the renovation instead of just use their own funds. It's not the same.
 

Capo

Prima Squadra
Prima Squadra
Joined
Apr 22, 2019
Messages
908
Likes
569
No one has mentioned anything about government funds. Only city's funds.

Government / City - Its interchangeable.

The point I am making as a citizen in Milan you would probably want the money to be spent on other priorities rather than give Inter or Milan a sweetheart deal to stay. They (government) been pissing in the wind for years, and now both teams are walking away they only now realising the taste of their own piss.
 

CafeCordoba

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Mar 7, 2004
Messages
35,623
Likes
15,155
Favorite Player
Toro, Barella
10 years of FIF
City and the government of the country are not interchangeable. What makes you guys say they are? Like brehme said, there are layers in between which means political capital needs to be used to get favouritable decisions from the government if state funds is to be used for something a specific city wants. There are other cities in Italy aswell.

The point of giving the sweetheart deal is it to be still better deal for the city than clubs leaving.

If the clubs leave, might be hard or even impossible to maintain the stadium anymore and all the events are gonna be in those stadiums in San Donato/Rozzano. It's a massive own goal by the city when they find themselves at this situation.
 

Solidus2009

Primavera
Primavera
Joined
Mar 13, 2022
Messages
43
Likes
50
Inter CEO Antonello said

Our focus remains on the Rozzano area. The Municipality has given its green light to the modification of the Territorial Government Plan (Pgt) and the analysis regarding the issue of roads is currently being completed in order to address any critical issues, if necessary, it will be possible to obtain a extension by the Cabassi family for the exclusivity on the land, which expires in April 2024.

The aim is to obtain final approval within 18 months, start construction in three years and be ready to open in the 2028/29 season. The master plan for a facility with a capacity of 70 thousand seats is currently being studied by the Populous studio, which is taking the details into consideration. At the same time, we are evaluating which facilities to include in a district made up of club buildings, museum and shop, with the aim of making it always accessible to the public.


Looks like you lot are moving forward with Rozzano. Good to hell with Sala. Let them keep the Meazza and rot. I love San Siro but after YEARS of wasting the time of both clubs Sala can go to the devil.
 

IL Fenomeno

Primavera
Primavera
Joined
Aug 14, 2023
Messages
312
Likes
420
The point of the renovation is to improve the building. That's the definition of renovaation. :D

I think the way how city can keep at least one club in Meazza is to make an offer they cannot refuse. So good financially that they rather stay in Meazza.

That's basically what I'm hoping since as I've said before, I don't want us to leave that stadium. Too much history and magic to be left behind. Just do the renovation well enough by leveraging the position the club(s) have.
The only good enough offer we can't refuse in my opinion is to become owner and also not pay for the renovating costs allone.
 

CafeCordoba

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Mar 7, 2004
Messages
35,623
Likes
15,155
Favorite Player
Toro, Barella
10 years of FIF
The only good enough offer we can't refuse in my opinion is to become owner and also not pay for the renovating costs allone.
I don't know about these things in detail, but I could see this being the reality. Which Milano most probably won't be offering at any point. But as both clubs are moving forward with the own stadium plans, quite concretely, it builds up the pressure to the council to present a big offer.

Let's see. They gonna see each other (again) next week.
 

Solidus2009

Primavera
Primavera
Joined
Mar 13, 2022
Messages
43
Likes
50
Inter CEO Antonello said

Our focus remains on the Rozzano area. The Municipality has given its green light to the modification of the Territorial Government Plan (Pgt) and the analysis regarding the issue of roads is currently being completed in order to address any critical issues, if necessary, it will be possible to obtain a extension by the Cabassi family for the exclusivity on the land, which expires in April 2024.

The aim is to obtain final approval within 18 months, start construction in three years and be ready to open in the 2028/29 season. The master plan for a facility with a capacity of 70 thousand seats is currently being studied by the Populous studio, which is taking the details into consideration. At the same time, we are evaluating which facilities to include in a district made up of club buildings, museum and shop, with the aim of making it always accessible to the public.


Looks like you lot are moving forward with Rozzano. Good to hell with Sala. Let them keep the Meazza and rot. I love San Siro but after YEARS of wasting the time of both clubs Sala can go to the devil

landstadiumcardinale.jpg

NEWS

Official: Documents confirm Milan’s purchase of stadium land – the price tag​

AC Milan have officially bought a piece of land in the San Francesco area as the stadium project has entered a new and important phase. As revealed in the documents, the price tag is also less than the €40m initially mentioned.

At the end of January, the technical committee of the San Donato council approved Milan’s stadium project in the San Francesco area. Right around the same time, the Rossoneri’s board of directors voted through the purchase of the land , which has now been confirmed.

The well-known stadium and financial expert Felice Raimondo has got his hands on the official documents, confirming Sportlifecity’s purchase of the land from the company Asio. Sportlifecity, of course, is now owned by Milan thanks to the takeover at the start of the project.

Development on both fronts. Good.
 

Capo

Prima Squadra
Prima Squadra
Joined
Apr 22, 2019
Messages
908
Likes
569
City and the government of the country are not interchangeable. What makes you guys say they are? Like brehme said, there are layers in between which means political capital needs to be used to get favouritable decisions from the government if state funds is to be used for something a specific city wants. There are other cities in Italy aswell.

You're getting pedantic.

City Council is another level that is still a bureaucratic organisation that governs and manages a local regionalised area.

I haven't looked into the model in Italy per se but I would be surprise if they dont follow a typical western process, and i mean this by saying, councillors are employed into their positions because of local constituents voting for them. In Australia they have a fixed terms for 5 years for example and manage the city and the funds of that city like a government. So yes, City is very much like the Government.

I recognise your point state funds can used to gain political favour and in this case unlikely to provide any such funds. However, the City can do the same like the state, and choose to deploy funds where they see fit.

My personally, I think the city would be negligent if they use the funds to give Inter/Milan a sweet heart deal. The people of Milano would probably see better use of those, and I would think they have the typical 10 objectives, which i guess would be something similar below;

A) Remove red tape and process, increasing productivity and creating a more viable city for strategic economic growth.
B) Better services and transport integration
C) Developing and planning for smart cities, creating more sustainable city and even looking a cleaner and greener initiatives.

These are three generic items that major cities across the globe would continue to use and say they promise to deliver. As for the San Siro, this would be in direct conflict now they have left it too late where the City would lose in such a deal.

Three years ago, they would have ticked every single one of those objectives while not being the contributor to the project. Now they have would have to give beyond their means if they want both organisation Inter/Milan to stay.

I don't know about these things in detail, but I could see this being the reality. Which Milano most probably won't be offering at any point. But as both clubs are moving forward with the own stadium plans, quite concretely, it builds up the pressure to the council to present a big offer.

Let's see. They gonna see each other (again) next week.

And its too late. The time for a deal to work for all parties was when both Inter and Milan submitted their proposal. Milan has now purchased the land, and Inter is looking at critical infrastructure and planning with the council.

It takes months to get to this point. And cant just be undone because the City decide oh wait now we like go ahead. Sala is a fat chick begging the guy stay the night with the offer but I'll give you a blowjob, when you have a 10 texting you at 1 AM, saying what are you doing, come over? Some will choose the fat chick's blow job, but Milan and Inter will most likely choose the hot bitch that you wanna smash and then brag to your mates about in the morning.
 

Puma

Allenatore
Allenatore
Joined
Mar 9, 2004
Messages
5,434
Likes
3,992
10 years of FIF
I think talk of a new stadium for Inter is premature when Suning have to repay a loan in the vicinity of 235 million in 100 days and we have no idea how it is going to work out.
 
Last edited:

CafeCordoba

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Mar 7, 2004
Messages
35,623
Likes
15,155
Favorite Player
Toro, Barella
10 years of FIF
You're getting pedantic.

City Council is another level that is still a bureaucratic organisation that governs and manages a local regionalised area.

I haven't looked into the model in Italy per se but I would be surprise if they dont follow a typical western process, and i mean this by saying, councillors are employed into their positions because of local constituents voting for them. In Australia they have a fixed terms for 5 years for example and manage the city and the funds of that city like a government. So yes, City is very much like the Government.

I recognise your point state funds can used to gain political favour and in this case unlikely to provide any such funds. However, the City can do the same like the state, and choose to deploy funds where they see fit.

My personally, I think the city would be negligent if they use the funds to give Inter/Milan a sweet heart deal. The people of Milano would probably see better use of those, and I would think they have the typical 10 objectives, which i guess would be something similar below;

A) Remove red tape and process, increasing productivity and creating a more viable city for strategic economic growth.
B) Better services and transport integration
C) Developing and planning for smart cities, creating more sustainable city and even looking a cleaner and greener initiatives.

These are three generic items that major cities across the globe would continue to use and say they promise to deliver. As for the San Siro, this would be in direct conflict now they have left it too late where the City would lose in such a deal.

Three years ago, they would have ticked every single one of those objectives while not being the contributor to the project. Now they have would have to give beyond their means if they want both organisation Inter/Milan to stay.



And its too late. The time for a deal to work for all parties was when both Inter and Milan submitted their proposal. Milan has now purchased the land, and Inter is looking at critical infrastructure and planning with the council.

It takes months to get to this point. And cant just be undone because the City decide oh wait now we like go ahead. Sala is a fat chick begging the guy stay the night with the offer but I'll give you a blowjob, when you have a 10 texting you at 1 AM, saying what are you doing, come over? Some will choose the fat chick's blow job, but Milan and Inter will most likely choose the hot bitch that you wanna smash and then brag to your mates about in the morning.
Okay you probably misunderstood what's the conversation was about or I misunderstood it.

What I meant by the difference of government and the city is exactly what you described. City controls the city's funds, the tax money paid to the city/municipality. Government does what they do with the money tax payers have paid to the state.

With the sweetheart deal, the benefit for the city would be that at least one of the teams would stay within Milano's jurisdiction and thus generate money for that municipality with the commercial activity around the football events but also with other events in the renovated stadium. Of course it's questionable how long would it take to breakeven with this calculation if the deal is really good for the clubs (well, Inter at this point).

But what everyone knows is that city most probably cannot afford to maintain Meazza just for the music etc events so it will cripple and thus the little commercial activity outside of football events ceases to exist aswell.
 

Capo

Prima Squadra
Prima Squadra
Joined
Apr 22, 2019
Messages
908
Likes
569
With the sweetheart deal, the benefit for the city would be that at least one of the teams would stay within Milano's jurisdiction and thus generate money for that municipality with the commercial activity around the football events but also with other events in the renovated stadium. Of course it's questionable how long would it take to breakeven with this calculation if the deal is really good for the clubs (well, Inter at this point).

They left this to late, in general if they came to the party years ago when Inter and Milan agreed on the model they're was a fighting chance to do exactly that. Now the City will need pay more than its fair share.

Inter could not take over San Siro by themselves, and would likely be telling Sala exactly what it they want. And it would have to be so far in Inter's favour being the financial record it would not make sense for the city of milan to go down that road. This is all my opinion, and I havent seen any formal costing or business case to suggest it is any different.
 

Jnr

La Grande Inter
La Grande Inter
Joined
Feb 14, 2007
Messages
11,652
Likes
5,338
Favorite Player
Il Capitano
Forum Supporter
10 years of FIF
Interisti : " Purchase the land first!!!

Anronelli: " The stadium will be toilet shape"

:yao:
 

junkie

Capitano
Capitano
Joined
Jun 21, 2011
Messages
2,236
Likes
1,265
Favorite Player
Ronaldo&Vieri
10 years of FIF
too bad for Cathedral project, it got spirit and history motives, just like our stadium should be
 

CafeCordoba

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Mar 7, 2004
Messages
35,623
Likes
15,155
Favorite Player
Toro, Barella
10 years of FIF
They left this to late, in general if they came to the party years ago when Inter and Milan agreed on the model they're was a fighting chance to do exactly that. Now the City will need pay more than its fair share.

Inter could not take over San Siro by themselves, and would likely be telling Sala exactly what it they want. And it would have to be so far in Inter's favour being the financial record it would not make sense for the city of milan to go down that road. This is all my opinion, and I havent seen any formal costing or business case to suggest it is any different.
Yes I understand what you mean. But what I mean city might lose both clients and they might lose all the events aswell as it would probably cost too much to maintain it.

Scenario A: both clubs go elsewhere -> Meazza won't be maintained as city cannot afford it, also loses all possible money from events (though no idea is this a relevant sum)
Scenario B: Inter stays -> city gives a nice deal to Inter but they get to keep Meazza running

I think with Scenario B is that the actual renovation which would suit Inter would cost too much but maybe if Inter would become part owner of the stadium or some similar arrangement, it could be agreed to do better renovation than what the city would do my themselves.

But as said, pure speculation by me since I don't have any credible numbers for either scenario. :D
 
Top