Villa Park Redevelopment

[Nii Lamptey]

Maybe Heck is conditioning everyone gradually for a ground move . Run Villa Park into the ground, "vandalise" sacred areas such as the Holte with Tererace View and Lower Grounds buffet nonsense , and pretty soon everyone will be less precious about moving

Adopting the Tories tactics with the NHS 👍🏼

[Nii Lamptey]

When I first heard this news I was relieved. My season ticket is on the front row of the North Stand Upper. I've got a great view, really like the fans around me and can obtain extra tickets near me for friends (both members and more casual supporters). I had braced myself for losing all of these benefits for two years at the very time we seem to be on the cusp of something special.

However, the talk of moving to the NEC has me worried. I've been going to VP for over sixty years and I love the Bartons before hand, the walk to the ground, the rituals, the memories. I actually find it easier to get away from VP than from my neighbouring clubs; Forest and Leicester.

A few years ago I went to see Atletico Madrid in the Vicente Calderon stadium. It was a bit like Newcastle as you could walk from the city centre, enjoying bars and restaurants on the way and feel the atmosphere growing as you approached the ground.

Now they've moved to a modern bowl miles from the city centre, near the airport and in a totally nondescript location.  I really don't want to be watching the game in a place like that.

Villa Park till I die.

Completely and utterly this. If we ever moved, that may be me done, not that it would matter to anyone but me probably. We have history in the bricks and mortar of our grounds that most if not all of those clubs that have moved to soulless bowls have ever had. The ground really is a massive part of what makes us who we are.

And I’ve been to Athletico Madrids new ground as well and it is just that a large, initially impressive, ultimately soulless place in the middle of fecking nowhere.

We're not the only club who has history within the bricks and mortar of Villa Park. Hosting more semi-finals than any other club ground, there are a lot of fans of other teams who also have fond memories of our historic football ground.

[PeterWithesShin]

I hope you're proud of yourself Mr Heck. You've RUINED Christmas for millions of young Villa fans around the world.

[boozey182]

A few thoughts, for what they are worth.

This surely is linked way to the Artimus buy in.  As we don't know the investment etc - it might be that pausing makes sense as our Third owner has an input.

The next 2 years could be some of the most important in the clubs history.  Realistically, we will never have a better chance to break into the top 4 and establish ourselves there.  Champions League, 150th year - potentially the club think we could be going "Global" much sooner than expected, and they don't want to risk that.   Realistically if we don't see success over the next 2 years - Unai will leave (might well do even if we do).  But I cant see him sticking if we don't keep progressing.

The concern over adding too many seats to fast, suggests to me that Heck wants to focus on revenue per head.  I think this is because, there attempts to offer premium match day experience suggest there is not the demand.  That combined with the fact that this 30K waiting list are very unlikely to buy a season ticket.  CL football will be far more profitable than extra seats - so maybe they want to avoid risking negative impacts on performance.

I think Heck seems like everything is his way or not at all.  The mess we have made of things like the rebrand shows if it's not what he thinks is 100% right he won't put his name to it.

Was Purslow pushing for the stadium?  Was it a vanity project which didn't add up quite as much as we thought.  I do wonder if we would really fill 52k every week given (or at least if we could have under Gerrard for example).  Maybe the idea is lets not risk short term success as the next two years could set us up for the next 10 years

I would imagine, Heck also wants time to come to his own conclusions over what the right next step is.  he may end up coming to the same point as Purslow did.

So I think with all the above they have decided to focus on smaller projects with more immediate short-term benefit.

The way things are being announced to the fans is far from ideal - no detail or explanation in lots of instances seemingly misleading.

I think this (the bit in bold) is the key to it, and I think there is a chance that we are reading too much into all of this. Myself included, because my first reaction when I saw the interview was "well, that probably means we're off somewhere else".

He spoke at length about the 150 year anniversary. Didn't he say something like "do something never done before in football"? I have no idea what that entails, but I could see it being his personal mission to make it special, and spectacular. If I was being unkind, I would say vanity project, but I won't. But, maybe that coupled with potentially getting in the 'Champions' League for the 'first' time, might be deemed enough reason to keep the capacity to a maximum for at least another year? We've also got the chaotic Council situation, which even if they're not directly involved in the trains etc, might still have to be involved in the construction? Closing roads etc. (I am out of my depth here, but I would imagine they'd play some kind of role?). Maybe the club just want to explore other options - maybe of keeping some seats available while construction starts so we don't lose as much revenue? Maybe wanting further assurances about transport before they commit, or maybe exploring other transport solutions? All that put together might be enough to think, let's just not rush into this right now, and make sure we get this right. He's only been in the job six months or so, and he probably won't make a bigger decision.

The problem is, yet again, the communication. The 'too many seats too soon' is nonsense. I've been trying to get tickets for the matches over Christmas for some friends and it's basically impossible if they're not members. While there may not be 30,000 willing buyers on the waiting list, there will be enough to fill a new North Stand - I'm certain of that. If we were to qualify for the Champions League, we could fill much more, even if it was say a few thousand 'tourists' every week. I don't buy that it would be too much, and i don't think it stands up to the slightest amount of scrutiny.

When you do an interview that you have set up, and basically scripted, only for most people to have far more questions than before they watched it, I would suggest that it probably wasn't done very well. He doesn't know who he is talking to, and it's coming across that he doesn't really care who he is talking to. He's saying what he wants to say, so deal with it. Maybe that sort of stuff doesn't really matter to most people, but from the response he's getting on here, it matters to quite a few of us.

I've seen a couple of tweets from the Mail reporter stressing that there are no plans to move from Villa Park, which may well be the entire truth. But there is so little trust between the fans and the board (or Heck) at the moment that the more I see it being refuted, the more I think it probably is exactly what is being planned. Surely there is someone at the club that is capable of communicating with fans like we're adults?

[tomd2103]

Build a new bigger stand on the mass of ground available behind the existing north stand. Start pretty well as soon as you like. When completed as soon as the season is finished, you knock down the old north stand and using hydraulic lifts move the new structure forward the 80 metres or so into place. Existing technology has moved larger structures greater distances than what this would involve.
 
The extra cost of hydraulics on a movable structure should be far less than the income lost from a reduced capacity for two years as well as not losing the atmosphere temporarily with a 3 sided stadium.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structure_relocation

I thought it has already been said that this isn't an option and the North Stand will have to be knocked down first?

[Steve67]

Is there a possibility that we could be bringing back a standing area? Or give away fans fewer seats?

[Brazilian Villain]

I can see where he is coming from about timing, it is probably the worst time in decades for us to knock down a stand and have a reduced capacity for two years.  It's tough to see when such a window would arise now for something on that scale to be done though.

I can see why possibly knocking down the stand in our first season or two in the CL might not be desirable, so maybe the exceptional start to the season has been a factor. Chelski have done fine in the CL over a couple of decades with a smaller stadium than ours. If in 2-3 years we're continually qualifying for the CL, and our sponsorship and shirt deals have shot up in value, we may be in a better place to have a reduced capacity for a season or two.

[langleylions]

So are we giving up on hosting euro 2028 games then , i cant see that being good for our profile

[VillaTim]

Build a new bigger stand on the mass of ground available behind the existing north stand. Start pretty well as soon as you like. When completed as soon as the season is finished, you knock down the old north stand and using hydraulic lifts move the new structure forward the 80 metres or so into place. Existing technology has moved larger structures greater distances than what this would involve.
 
The extra cost of hydraulics on a movable structure should be far less than the income lost from a reduced capacity for two years as well as not losing the atmosphere temporarily with a 3 sided stadium.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structure_relocation

It's  a nice idea but totally impractical.

[Steve67]

So are we giving up on hosting euro 2028 games then , i cant see that being good for our profile

Unless we are playing Champs League football?

[ChicagoLion]

I can see where he is coming from about timing, it is probably the worst time in decades for us to knock down a stand and have a reduced capacity for two years.  It's tough to see when such a window would arise now for something on that scale to be done though.

I can see why possibly knocking down the stand in our first season or two in the CL might not be desirable, so maybe the exceptional start to the season has been a factor. Chelski have done fine in the CL over a couple of decades with a smaller stadium than ours. If in 2-3 years we're continually qualifying for the CL, and our sponsorship and shirt deals have shot up in value, we may be in a better place to have a reduced capacity for a season or two.

But what he said was too many seats too soon.
He could have said exactly what you said, he didn’t.
This guy has form, remember what he said about the badge, no one bought that either because it was bullshit.

[Percy McCarthy]

He's not hiding anything, it's in clear sight: "Over the summer months I became more concerned we were adding too many seats too fast"

He's been here 6 months and the plans were well advanced before he got here.  Let him figure out what is best before criticising him for cancelling plans that weren't even his.

But that is clearly a load of absolute nonsense. As I said before, we've got the 8th biggest stadium in the country, and it's miles smaller than those in the top 7. Also the facilities in the North are shite, and the hospitality offering is terrble too, as behind glass executive boxes went out with the Ark. 10,000 clearly isn't too many seats, and it's certainly not too fast. The stadium expansion is an investment in our future, and unlike many investments it's an almost guaranteed massive boost to revenue. There's only so much further they're going to be able to increase season ticket prices, and that won't go anywhere near to matching what the extra capacity would have brought in.

It's like investing in the first team, if you don't do it and are happy to stand still, sooner or later you get left behind.

Spot on.

[London Villan]

Come on... the 41st anniversaries are always the best...

[Malandro]

Build a new bigger stand on the mass of ground available behind the existing north stand. Start pretty well as soon as you like. When completed as soon as the season is finished, you knock down the old north stand and using hydraulic lifts move the new structure forward the 80 metres or so into place. Existing technology has moved larger structures greater distances than what this would involve.
 
The extra cost of hydraulics on a movable structure should be far less than the income lost from a reduced capacity for two years as well as not losing the atmosphere temporarily with a 3 sided stadium.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structure_relocation

It's  a nice idea but totally impractical.

O ye, of little faith. We are doing this AND the subterranean pitch.

[ChicagoLion]

He's not hiding anything, it's in clear sight: "Over the summer months I became more concerned we were adding too many seats too fast"

He's been here 6 months and the plans were well advanced before he got here.  Let him figure out what is best before criticising him for cancelling plans that weren't even his.

But that is clearly a load of absolute nonsense. As I said before, we've got the 8th biggest stadium in the country, and it's miles smaller than those in the top 7. Also the facilities in the North are shite, and the hospitality offering is terrble too, as behind glass executive boxes went out with the Ark. 10,000 clearly isn't too many seats, and it's certainly not too fast. The stadium expansion is an investment in our future, and unlike many investments it's an almost guaranteed massive boost to revenue. There's only so much further they're going to be able to increase season ticket prices, and that won't go anywhere near to matching what the extra capacity would have brought in.

It's like investing in the first team, if you don't do it and are happy to stand still, sooner or later you get left behind.

Spot on.

Yes worth repeating and shows up the bullshit that Heck has come out with.