No Kingsford StadiumUncategorized

Letter to Councillors: Kingsford jobs figures do not stack up

Dear Councillor, Kingsford jobs figures do not stack up The position of NKS is very clear: ACC officers have failed in their duty to scrutinise the economic benefit case presented by the applicants for the Kingsford stadium proposals.  This failure alone, is sufficient ground for a Judicial Review, which is highly likely to be successful.  We would hope to avoid this by providing you with the correct interpretation of the AFC figures. One of the central issues that has led planners to justify recommending approval of the application is the creation of new jobs that will come with the development.  The figures are purely assumptions, which have been accepted by ACC officers without sufficient scrutiny. The figures quoted for new jobs are all based on crowds diminishing to 8,500 average per game.  With AFC performing well, there is no reason to use such a low average.  This season to date, the Pittodrie average attendance is over 16,000. The presumption of crowds of 8,500 gives the Kingsford option an increase of 347-408 full time equivalent jobs.  These figures are misleading and unrealistic.  The club have used a doomsday scenario to bolster the figures. The economics case is unsound, leading any approved application open to legal challenge.

  • By using a crowd average of 8,500, there is a reduction of 194 jobs from the present day
  • By showing an increased crowd at Kingsford of 13,476, this increases jobs by 346
  • By showing an increased crowd at Kingsford of 15,000, this increases jobs to 407
  • The job increases stated all reintroduce the 194 jobs lost from the unrealistic 8,500 average attendance base case scenario
  • Using the current season’s average attendance, there would be NO JOBS CREATED BY A NEW STADIUM AT KINGSFORD.
The economic case is the cornerstone of the recommendation made by council officers.  The unrealistic new events and the unrealistic job figures generate a very unsound economic argument. We respectfully ask that you consider the detail of the economic case, which we believe has not been presented accurately to councillors. This is one of a number of elements of this application which is open to challenge and we hope you will be able to debate and explore this issue before a decision is taken. Thank you for taking the time to read this.   Diane Reid / Heather Brock/Clare Davidson Directors No Kingsford Stadium Ltd Appendix: Jobs created scenarios submitted by AFC – with a new current season average included
Do nothing scenario Base case 16/17 average Current average attendances Move to Kingsford Sensitivity Test – Kingsford
Average gate 8,500 13,083 16,412 13,476 15,000
  Total equivalent jobs     353     547   More than highest ‘move to Kingsford’ scenario!       700     761
Change if stadium does not go ahead     -194   n/a   n/a (Still higher!)   +346*   +407*
*Kingsford scenarios include the 194 jobs reduced by using an unrealistic average crowd of 8,500  ]]>

3 thoughts on “Letter to Councillors: Kingsford jobs figures do not stack up

  1. I’ve been saying this all along. Even if they get the go ahead. Surely the existing staff would move to the new Pittodrie thus creating very few new jobs.

  2. Good luck tommorrow.Many Dons fans like myself are against this proposal. They should concentrate on rebuilding Pittodrie.This is feasible despite the rhetoric coming out of the club.They have failed to properly consult the fans. Many are only backing this because they naturally fear losing the club altogether. AFC have based their campaign to build the stadium on fear.

  3. I fully support your aims and goals as season ticket holder and wish you all the best to reverse this. I know I wouldn’t be following them to Kingsford because I simply cannot make the 7 miles from my city centre home. At least make them change their name. They dont deserve to be called Aberdeen anymore.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.