It was mentioned at the shareholders forum.
I have to say I'd not heard of it but lots of others knew where it was.
He asked us not to discuss till sorted.


But it'll be great if jhe pulls it off.
Best in the league.

His excitement about having the plans drawn up for him to see, was palpable...

I came out of listening to the interview with a confused mind over the west side... He seemed to refer to an exciting set of plans that would offer little return... But then went on to say that the West does needed covering... Now the approved plans for the west do seem to me to be pretty basic and by no means exciting... And I certainly got the inference that he wanted rid of the portacabins and associated scaffolding. Matt seems to talk as he thinks and sometimes that doesn't come across clearly.


Was he talking about the approved plans (which if that's financially unviable would make going through planning a bit pointless), or another set of proposals for the west???

I took it as the approved plans are the basic option, while he has had a better scheme drawn up but there is little ROI as it would only increase capacity by 300 or so. That's why the NS is been focused on for major redevelopment as we can get another 1700-2000 supporters in the ground, and if we really start trouble an 11k average then he would consider the space to the south. 

I understand what hou mean about talking while thinking. Luckily he thinks intelligently. 


What he's saying is that he'd like to do something on the West but the fancy designs don't improve attendance so ROI isn't very good.
Whereas the same money spent on North will give us massive return.


So I think he will just put a roof on West, though he'll have to keep the media area somehow.

The latest planning application does show the TV gantry will be situated below the new roof being accessible by staircase from the rear of the stand.