Villa Park Redevelopment

[chrisw1]

I agree Lee.  It sounds like an excuse to me.

A poster on here confirmed he had been at a networking event with someone from Villa ( a commercial Director I think) who said it was because we were worried about the poor demand for the GA+ tickets.  That seems most likely to me.

That said, I can also see some sense in the theory of us maximising the income from the stand so we can get a higher PSR allowance for it if and when we do redevop it.  If that's a thing it does make some sense, but then if it was the case I'm sure we'd be seeing the new plans now if the intention was to start in the next few years.

[Demitri_C]

Would people have preferred re naming the stadium ahead of the changes around villa park to help with FFP? Genuine question

[Dogtanian]

Well with the difficulties getting in, we could get sponsored by Fort Knox.

[littleoldme]

Canned to play in a full house as Emery want's it that way, i'm not having it.
We win the flipping thing, league too, do we can the idea until we stop winning, then build a new North when not, more going on behind the scenes, or worse, nothing.

[Ads]

That's what Emery said. It's a good reason to hide behind, a man approaching divine like status and universally popular.

The biggest issue on us moving isn't a single statement said once by a transient member of staff. It's land availability and land cost. It's government reform to planning, it's all sorts. Circumstances have to be right, maybe they never will be.

[Risso]

I agree Lee.  It sounds like an excuse to me.

A poster on here confirmed he had been at a networking event with someone from Villa ( a commercial Director I think) who said it was because we were worried about the poor demand for the GA+ tickets.  That seems most likely to me.

That said, I can also see some sense in the theory of us maximising the income from the stand so we can get a higher PSR allowance for it if and when we do redevop it.  If that's a thing it does make some sense, but then if it was the case I'm sure we'd be seeing the new plans now if the intention was to start in the next few years.

I reckon there'd be huge demand for GA+ tickets if it was done properly, especially as it's a way of getting ahead on the season ticket list. But they haven't done it properly, it's absolutely hopeless. Take the Lower Grounds. Not many people are going to avail themselves of £75 worth of free shit beer and almost inedible food. Then at half time, they've still got to queue up at the existing shit kiosks in the concourse, and use the same rancid toilets.Then with Terrace View, it's a free drink and the ability to be able to buy a drink without a massive queue at half time.

Then with some of the main hospitality, it's nearly a grand a game, per person.

[LeeB]

That's what Emery said. It's a good reason to hide behind, a man approaching divine like status and universally popular.

The biggest issue on us moving isn't a single statement said once by a transient member of staff. It's land availability and land cost. It's government reform to planning, it's all sorts. Circumstances have to be right, maybe they never will be.

Building costs keep inflating, I reckon they were a bit worried is was going to cost more than first evisaged and wouldn't really pay for itself, and Heck promised them he could squeeze more of the existing set up.

[London Villan]

I agree Lee.  It sounds like an excuse to me.

A poster on here confirmed he had been at a networking event with someone from Villa ( a commercial Director I think) who said it was because we were worried about the poor demand for the GA+ tickets.  That seems most likely to me.

That said, I can also see some sense in the theory of us maximising the income from the stand so we can get a higher PSR allowance for it if and when we do redevop it.  If that's a thing it does make some sense, but then if it was the case I'm sure we'd be seeing the new plans now if the intention was to start in the next few years.

Might have been me - it was one of the reasons. Creating an additional 2000-3000 premium seats in the new stand didn't stack up on the current demand - as is being proved at the moment with the the number of seats available.

He did also say that losing the North Stand and a third of the Trinity at the start of our biggest season for a generation was also a consideration.

[Ads]

That's what Emery said. It's a good reason to hide behind, a man approaching divine like status and universally popular.

The biggest issue on us moving isn't a single statement said once by a transient member of staff. It's land availability and land cost. It's government reform to planning, it's all sorts. Circumstances have to be right, maybe they never will be.

Building costs keep inflating, I reckon they were a bit worried is was going to cost more than first evisaged and wouldn't really pay for itself, and Heck promised them he could squeeze more of the existing set up.

They absolutely do. It will never get any cheaper for materials. We'll knock it down next year.

[Villan82]

A few points

1. Heck is already killing people's love for the club which is quite a feat considering it's one of the best teams on the field we have had in 50 years.

2. There is no way Emery would have the final say on an infrastructure project that precedes his tenure and will have impact decades after his tenure.

3. There is no way they cancelled it because of on-the-field success. During Man U's glory days of the mid 90s to mid 00s cranes and building works were ever present at Old Trafford, ditto Liverpool in the Klopp era.

4. Finances: yes PSR is tight. Do we really think keeping open an almost 50 year old stand that cost us £1m to build in 1977 is going to be the difference when they have spent many millions painting it up, putting in new seats, creating new premium experiences etc?

Heck is on record as saying last November he decided it was a bad idea to go ahead. It would have been 'do or die' at that stage with the logistics o everything. He has obviously got out his power point and spent a lot of time arguing in favour of not going ahead with the project and they have agreed.

He will be gone by the time it bites us.

[olaftab]

Empty seats my lord, empty seats. Huge swathes of Trinity upper, middle and DE upper central illustrates a major problem with Heck's revenue generation strategy. Any business knows that money comes through volume.

[chrisw1]

I agree Lee.  It sounds like an excuse to me.

A poster on here confirmed he had been at a networking event with someone from Villa ( a commercial Director I think) who said it was because we were worried about the poor demand for the GA+ tickets.  That seems most likely to me.

That said, I can also see some sense in the theory of us maximising the income from the stand so we can get a higher PSR allowance for it if and when we do redevop it.  If that's a thing it does make some sense, but then if it was the case I'm sure we'd be seeing the new plans now if the intention was to start in the next few years.

Might have been me - it was one of the reasons. Creating an additional 2000-3000 premium seats in the new stand didn't stack up on the current demand - as is being proved at the moment with the the number of seats available.

He did also say that losing the North Stand and a third of the Trinity at the start of our biggest season for a generation was also a consideration.

But as Risso said they're judging the demand based on white elephants.  The Terrace View is meant to be a premium offering but comes with poor seats.  I think they were hoping more current ST holders would upgrade, but the price is too steep and the offer just isn't compelling enough.

And if they can't work out why people aren't too keen to spend £70 extra on a pretty shite eat-all-you-want buffet right before a game, then they're not the brightest.

If it was about redev before a big season, then surely they would have just put it back a year, not canned it and spent a fortune on the stand.

[Ads]

We've already caught up and competed for 9/10s of the season against sides with 60,000 seater stadia and commercial revenue that dwarfs ours.

We're a rare example in history of Great Man Theory actually working. We have 3; Emery, NS and WE. That triumvirate is what allows us to compete. 10,000 extra on the gate will make it easier, not as easy as regular Champions League football and if you're thinking that was all that stands between greatness and mediocrity (a new North), then you need to re-read Percy post on the SHA Thread about what a minor miracle it is that we've done what we have.

[LeeB]

I agree Lee.  It sounds like an excuse to me.

A poster on here confirmed he had been at a networking event with someone from Villa ( a commercial Director I think) who said it was because we were worried about the poor demand for the GA+ tickets.  That seems most likely to me.

That said, I can also see some sense in the theory of us maximising the income from the stand so we can get a higher PSR allowance for it if and when we do redevop it.  If that's a thing it does make some sense, but then if it was the case I'm sure we'd be seeing the new plans now if the intention was to start in the next few years.

Might have been me - it was one of the reasons. Creating an additional 2000-3000 premium seats in the new stand didn't stack up on the current demand - as is being proved at the moment with the the number of seats available.

He did also say that losing the North Stand and a third of the Trinity at the start of our biggest season for a generation was also a consideration.

But as Risso said they're judging the demand based on white elephants.  The Terrace View is meant to be a premium offering but comes with poor seats.  I think they were hoping more current ST holders would upgrade, but the price is too steep and the offer just isn't compelling enough.

And if they can't work out why people aren't too keen to spend £70 extra on a pretty shite eat-all-you-want buffet right before a game, then they're not the brightest.

If it was about redev before a big season, then surely they would have just put it back a year, not canned it and spent a fortune on the stand.

And that's the rub, right there. It's a shit offer.

It may work in the states or at a theme park when you're in a venue miles from anywhere, but there are a plethora of options for you to eat and drink much better fare at a much more realistic price only a short taxi ride away.

[Drummond]

The thing that doesn't sit right with me is that it was canned because Emery doesn't want us playing with only 3 sides of the stadium up.

I'm not disputing that Unai would prefer not to have to deal with that, but I find it hard to believe that this single issue would be enough to bring about the cancellation of a major infrastructure project.

Also, despite the fact we're obviously and rightly giving the keys to the place to the manager, I'm a bit incredulous that we'd effectively allow the football manager the final say on this sort of thing.

But last of all, I'm actually surprised to the point of not really believing that in would bother Emery that much that he'd kybosh the buliding of a new stand because of. This is a man who has breathed new life into the concept of mend-and-make-do, getting on with stuff and not making a fuss, it just doesn't fit for me.

I think there is a multitude of reasons.

Emery's view about support.
Increasing the revenue per head.
A bigger, bolder plan.
More GA+ offering, and whether they can generate demand for it.
A wider development, of perhaps the whole place.
The Witton Station work, or lack of it.
The wider transport infrastructure plan.
Lack of Support from the council (given they're fucked financially)
The bringing on of new shareholders/directors, who are specialists to oversee it.
A review of whether we do actually relocate and Heck gets potted as part of it.
That people are changing their minds on any or all aspects of that rebuild.


Something needs to happen, and when the new whatever, is built, they will want it built specifically for the purpose of the best return.

We're in a perfect storm, ahead of the game in what Emery has done on the pitch, a new guy in charge who wants his own ideas, shit service currently being offered in the existing spaces, the rush to modernise things like tickets and a vastly improved product on the pitch.

Ultimately, the current support want to get in easily, buy a drink/food and watch great football with their friends and family. The question is whether they will generate the return the club want/need.