I don’t think you are being paranoid at all. You have two American owners who are in a financial hole. The combined site would be worth more than merely one. We know Ogren will not put any more cash in. He could try to create a non voting class of shares and do a Rights Issue or leverage something (stadium). He could do a sale and leaseback. It is possible that he could off load some of his shares to an EPL club in the same way Hibs were looking at.

I've always thought to myself looking at the huge debt we are in to Mark Ogren. How does he in any way shape or form start to re-coup some of that money, never mind eventually make a profit on his investment?

And the only conclusion i always arrive at is = sell Tannadice.

Well it wouldn't just be Tannadice of course, it would the old brick building across the road, the club shop, the small car park adjacent to it and Gussie (though i believe DUSF hold some form of ownership over that?).

I'm not sure how much money all that land is worth but if Tannadice and Dens are suddenly up for sale then that is enough space for an ASDA and a car park i.e. millions.

From Ogren's point of view selling Tannadice and investing into a new modern Stadium that also has an attached money making Hotel and also doubles up a venue for future music concerts and business conferences is probably the first smart move he could make in his investment in the city of Dundee.

For us, it would be a devastating outcome. But i think that is where we are headed, sadly. I've always thought Nelms has invitingly left the door open for us and him. Probably the only way it gets off the ground.

And this fan survey about Tannadice confirms a lot of my fears.

He wants another big donation from DUSF to go towards the upkeep and they apparently are (rightly imo) against that. When have DUFC as a club ever specifically asked the fans to contribute towards the upkeep of Tannadice? Never. 

I think this only ends one way. I really do.

Another perspective on this may be the questions are not just coming from us.  Perhaps the wee teams owners don't have the funds to realise the promises they made of a new stadium and the only way they can afford it and receive local/ regional/ national/ UEFA/ FIFA funding is if the stadium is shared.

Could even be the club have been approached and are just testing the waters to see the appetite within the fan base.

Financially it probably makes sense emotionally I dont want to share a ground we lose some of our identity

David_Blunkett wrote:

Before any proposed stadium is even considered, a suitable, workable site in Dundee would need to be found.

I don't think there's a site that works without taking up a huge chunk of Caird Park or Camperdown, even then access issues to both are very problematic and probably wouldn't be allowed.

The ideal time was when Scotland bid for 2008, it would've happened, there was a will from all parties, clubs, politicians, governing bodies, logistical issues would've been swept aside,  but the bid failed.

Neither club can afford to go solo, or even halfies on a stadium, it would be a move to a soulless privately owned stadium within a retail/housing project, where we'd be paying rent forever to investors who want a profitable return.

The land Tannadice and Dens and area, would only be used for low cost/afford housing. Given the way the housing market is, I doubt there would be any significant profit/appetite in it for any developer.

And my personal thoughts apart from I wouldn't give Dundee the steam off my pish, let alone share a stadium, is with two sets of owners from a country where sports is a franchise, where they don't understand the Scottish attachment to our clubs, a move to a shared stadium is one step closer to merger talks happening.
 

 
Good post.

Fuck the yanks and FTD

Down at Riverside would be the best venue

It's a simple as this- No to any ground share.

If that lot next door haven't invested in their ground and its an absolute dive, then that's their issue. Since 1992 the club have invested in Tannadice and got it to where it is now with three relatively modern stands. They/us sacrificed playing squads to invest on infrastructure whilst others spanked upwards of 20 million.

The Shed end could do with a new stand and that's it, the rest is building and maintenance costs which will come from any stadium.

Give me the old lady before any new build stadiums which in my opinion are absolutely soulless without any character.

Finally if Ogren has an ounce of intelligence he will wait until the summer if this is his plan, let's all focus on the fight to get back up and get behind the team.

CCX2 2010 wrote:

It's a simple as this- No to any ground share.

If that lot next door haven't invested in their ground and its an absolute dive, then that's their issue. Since 1992 the club have invested in Tannadice and got it to where it is now with three relatively modern stands. They/us sacrificed playing squads to invest on infrastructure whilst others spanked upwards of 20 million.

The Shed end could do with a new stand and that's it, the rest is building and maintenance costs which will come from any stadium.

Give me the old lady before any new build stadiums which in my opinion are absolutely soulless without any character.

Finally if Ogren has an ounce of intelligence he will wait until the summer if this is his plan, let's all focus on the fight to get back up and get behind the team.

Well said mate.  And as Blunket has already said - the chances of Dundee's new stadium actually look pretty slim, they are saying they will be in it by 2025, good ain!   

Is Venison Dear? wrote:

I've always thought that ground sharing is our only sensible option. But then again, I probably support a merger in the long term as a proud Dundonian. We are both yoyo clubs these days and the 80s glory days will never return.

Dundee City FC. It might work.

(prepare for incoming!)

I just don't see how a merged Dundee team would bring about any real improvement in success. Fans of both clubs wouldn't (in the vast majority) support the new merged club.

Even in say 25-30 years when a new generation of supporter is around the new merged club would only be as big as say Aberdeen or Hibs.

I just don't see the point personally. Neither club may achieve much in our life times but at least their history will remain intact.
 

The whole context of football in Dundee is based on a local rivalry.  I share the view that a merged club will inevitably lesser than the two clubs in aggregate apart.  Our 'rightful place would remain behind the Glasgow clubs, the Edinburgh clubs and Aberdeen just on population count alone.  Whilst we are not there at the moment that place will return so why get rid of the local rivalry?

On groundshare, it has to make sense, but I can only see that working if we both became tenants of the Council (or some other 3rd party owner) rather than joint owners of a stadium.  We'll never be on a par going into that and it will never work if we are not - unless as tenants.  Of course we'd have to deal with the Fun's generational insolvency and that adds a potentially insurmountable obstacle to the whole thing.