Arsenal’s Emirates Stadium, which opened in 2006, was one of the most modern stadiums of its time. Its construction marked a major milestone for the club, not only enhancing its image but also providing a significant financial boost. With a seating capacity of 60,704, it is among the larger stadiums in England, offering a great matchday experience for fans. However, in comparison to some of its European and Premier League counterparts, the Emirates is relatively modest in size, especially when considering the immense potential for growth and the ever-expanding fan base.
As Arsenal continues to establish itself as a dominant force in English football, the idea of expanding the stadium has been discussed within the club as part of a strategy to compete at the highest level both financially and competitively. Last season, the club’s owners began exploring ways to further capitalise on their stake in one of London’s most successful teams. Expanding the Emirates is now a real possibility, with reports suggesting that the club is considering increasing its capacity to around 80,000 seats, according to a source speaking to Bloomberg.
This potential expansion would be a significant undertaking, offering the club the opportunity to increase matchday revenues and accommodate the growing demand for tickets, especially as Arsenal’s fan base continues to expand. However, such a decision is not one to be taken lightly. Expanding the stadium would come with substantial costs, and the club would need to carefully plan the logistics of such an endeavour. The prospect of filling a larger stadium is certainly exciting, but to ensure that the move makes financial sense, the club must continue to perform on the pitch and secure major trophies.
The growing demand for Arsenal’s matches, combined with an expanding global fanbase, makes an expanded Emirates Stadium an attractive proposition. Yet, as the club aims to compete on the highest level, winning major titles will be crucial in solidifying the need for such an expansion. Only with sustained success, both domestically and in Europe, will the club’s ambition to expand the Emirates become a reality.
ADMIN COMMENT
So here are some simple rules which I must insist commenters follow….
You agree not to give any personal abuse to other Arsenal fans. Everyone is allowed to hold their own opinions even if you disagree with them. It COSTS NOTHING TO BE POLITE TO OTHER ARSENAL FANS.
CALLING ALL ARSENAL FANS! Anyone who would like to contribute an Article or Video opinion piece on JustArsenal, please contact us through this link…
I doubt if The London Borough Of Islington would allow any significant capacity increas
Increase
More revenue (economic growth) for The London Borough Of Islington.
I hope the Islington council see it the same way I am seeing it. Let’s make Arsenal great again.
😊👍🤞🙏
From the council’s latest report: “Deprivation – Islington is the 53rd most deprived authority in England and the 6th most deprived in London. It has the 10th highest rate of child poverty
nationally (the highest in London) and 4th
highest rate of pensioner poverty in
London.”
How do you imagine Islington will pay for all the additional transport infrastructure etc. when they can’t afford to pay for everything they need to provide currently?
Bertie, I think they are only talking about 2000 extra seats. That’s not such a big impact mate
AdminPat If it’s only 2000, then I don’t see too much to protest about.
AdminPat
I’m confused (it happens easily). You say, “I think they are only talking about 2000 extra seats”, yet the article says, “with reports suggesting that the club is considering increasing its capacity to around 80,000 seats.”
My maths was never very good, but that’s an increase of 20,000 seats, isn’t it? If so, that represents an increase in “footfall” in the area on matchdays of over 30% on the current full capacity attendance. A pretty large impact on transport and on residents surely.
They can afford it. Just a game a week for the 80,000 paying spectators can’t bring the whole infrastructure down in Islington.
And there is a complete difference between a business (Arsenal FC attracting more than 80,000 a week) and a council struggling to look after its residents.. The pensioners / children are dependent while a business like Arsenal FC is what the council collects its taxes / revenues.
Wouldn’t the extra revenue a week for the businesses help in paying for the poverty stricken council? Wouldn’t the revenue brought in by the 80,000 each weekend help the local Islington businesses? Which in turn means more money for the council coffers.
If any council wants to make more money in order to be able to afford to look after its own residents then they have got to find ways to boost up their local economies. The more businesses pop up, they will in turn provide more jobs and revenues for the council.
Isn’t it?
😊🤞
Goonster, the residents don’t want a bigger stadium, it was difficult enough to get an agreement for 60000.. It was residents that prevented the further expansion of Highbury..
That’s a different argument. If the residents don’t want the stadium to be extended then that’s okay. But the council has the final say in most cases. If the council wants to redevelop a certain area it can consult the residents but the final decision is on the council. A lot of residents around White hart Lane (Spurs stadium) did not approve of the new Tottenham stadium but the council saw the stadium proposal as a redevelopment / economic opportunity so B it approved the stadium expansion. The small businesses and residents around there that weren’t happy were forced out so that the redevelopment could go ahead. I remember one small family owned business right next to the stadium refusing to give in. All of a sudden a fire enveloped that small building and that was it for them. They had to accept the money to move..
Many many residents around London have been forced out of certain areas due to redevelopment projects by the Boroughs / councils. For example, a lot of residents in South West London around Elephant and Castle, Oval, Kenington, Lambeth, Brixton etc have been getting pushed out of those areas for the London Expansion projects for more than a decade now. People did not want to leave their homes but were forced to leave. Elephant and Castle, Lambeth, Brixton, Kenington etc areas are much more up market..
Look at the “Heathrow Airport” expansion projects. Many residents did not approve of Terminal 5 expansion but what happened? The council forced that deal through even if it was unpopular. Now Heathrow Airport asked for more expansios, this has caused a lot of protests and disapproval from local residents, but the Airport is going to be expanded whether the Locals want it or not.
Economics / Money / revenue for any government / council comes first in most cases. The locals opinion comes second in a lot of cases..
Isn’t it?
😊
In terms of surrounding infrastructure, you can’t compare the Sp*rs stadium with what we’re talking about for The Emirates though.
The infrastructure around the Sp*rs stadium was agreed as part of their whole development package at the time. All worked out and approved for a capacity of just over 60,000. That’s not the case with Arsenal now where we’re talking about new, big, infrastructure (enough to cope with an increase of 30+% spectators) added on to the existing one.
Councillors are accountable to their electorates and as there’s a considerable squeeze on their existing services, as the latest report shows, they are hardly going to sanction large, additional, expenditures on improving the infrastructure to accommodate, primarily, Arsenal’s wishes. Never mind what local residents (voters) may have to say – which I doubt will be positive as “Jax” has mentioned.
Google is littered with reports on the schemes various councils have thought up to get more revenue – almost all have come a cropper. You’ll find councils aren’t too adventurous nowadays because of that. Ask your local councillor(s).
You’re also missing the fact that the money would need to be found “up front” to get the work done. The redevelopment of the stadium would take place over a fairly long period so any addition revenue will be some way off (always assuming Arsenal could fill the 80,000-stadium regularly season in and out, of course – as “Derek” alludes to).
Finally, the proposal to increase the capacity at The Emirates would mean an increase of over 30% in spectator footfall in the immediate and surrounding areas – that’s not certainly insubstantial if you ask anyone connected with pedestrian flow and transport issues.
Goonster,
To make Arsenal great again, you need a good team on the pitch, not more fans in the stands.
Just saying.
This is not a new story – there were articles about this on JA only a few months ago. Actually, there’s been talk of expanding The Emirates from just after it was originally opened. However, there were specific agreements made with the council at that time about capacity because of the effect on the local area.
The problem that some fans overlook is that the surrounding infrastructure, transport etc, would need to be expanded greatly to take account of the additional people attending matches. The existing infrastructure just about copes now but couldn’t with another 20,000 or whatever each matchday.
This isn’t like building a new stadium from scratch – like at Arsenal’s or Sp*rs when all of this is taken into account within the planning. This is adding to infrastructure that wasn’t planned.
That will be very expensive and, clearly, Islington doesn’t have the money to do it (they don’t have the money for all the current things they need to do). If KSE/Arsenal were to pay for all of that as well, in addition to the not insubstantial costs of re-developing the stadium itself, we’re talking big money which would take years to recoup in additional revenue. I’m not holding my breath waiting for the green light.
Bertie…and to think they could have built an 80000 seater if they’d taken the Kings Cross/York Way option. To their credit, Arsenal were determined to keep the stadium in Islington.
Yes, good on them.
I remember the debate around the (then) proposed stadium and I’m pretty sure that the current capacity was a matter of some argument with the council and that, as a result, it was “baked in” as the agreed capacity which makes an increase from 60,000 to 80,000 (I’m not sure where the 2,000 mentioned earlier comes from) unlikely to say the least.
You’re right, it will never happen., although I’m sure there would be no problem ‘selling’ those extra seats.
I agree it’s very unlikely due to all associated costs. I wonder if they could do something to Drayton Park station to utilise that but would imagine this has already been looked at.
As with Holloway Rd station, it’s not been upgraded with increased safety features, so kept closed on match days. I used to live along there , so know it would be very dangerous with possibly thousands on the platform.The funding provided by Arsenal to help refurbish Holloway Rd was (I’m in formed) spent on Highbury & Islington station. A fully functioning HollowayRd & Drayton Pk would make such a difference to help relieve the cojestion post match.
I want to be of the thinking to think that, when the Ems was first contruced under Arsena Winger regime. Plans must had been made having in mind to leave space for expanding the seating capacity of the Stadium in future as time went by.
Hopefully the Arsenal authorities who are concerned with the expansion of the Ems will push hard and hard to expand the Ems to the planned 80,000 plus all seated capacity stadium sooner than latter to ease matcchday ticket congestion problem being currently experienced by Arsenal’s fans.
And possibly make it all covered retractable track roofing Stadium,
While they are at they need to vastly improve the toilet facilities and the bar/eatery outlets, all of which are a nightmare at halftime.
And I remember reading that Arsenal were given an option for expansion in the future before the Ashburton Grove deal was finalised. All they had to do was ask for permission in the future and let the process take its time..
The cost to do this would be surely hard to justify for only a 25% increase in capacity. So much extra infrastructure, let alone purchase orders would be needed for the flats nearby, not to mention the cost of the actual upgrade. Seems unrealistic to me.