Villa Park Redevelopment

[Risso]

Building a brand new ground at Villa Park means we'd have a long period where we wont have anywhere to play.  Spurs had Wembley, where would we go?

I was thinking about this. I know it'd be really shit for all concerned, but we might need to relocate to London for a couple of years. There's really nothing even vaguely local that will suffice.

That would never happen. Biggest local grounds are the Dogheads or Leicester at 32,000, which would at least accommodate all of our season ticket holders. The King Power will be 40,000 when they've finished the expansion. London is a two and a half dour drive with no traffic, which would easily become three hours plus if you factor in parking and getting to which ever ground it was. Trains wouldn't have the capacity or reliability at weekends to ship that many people down.

Before they plumped for Wembley, Spurs were considering using Milton Keynes which holds 31,000.

[pauliewalnuts]

All that time, effort and money to plan and submit for approval the new North Stand.

Then some tweaks, ie removing Villa Live. Then, one imagines, plenty of back and forth re the station improvements.

Then, a massive company with huge experience of media and stadiums / sports organisations becomes part owner of V Sports, in a move which the club described as about 'improving' infrastructure, AND IN THE VERY SAME WEEK Heck tells us that the North Stand rebuild is effectively cancelled.

I know they've said we're not moving etc etc but, tbh, I am now at the point where I don't trust much that Chris Heck says, and what's more, if we were considering moving or a new stadium - does anyone think they'd actually tell us that right now?

No, they'll say whatever they need to say to close the subject down so it doesn't become a distraction.

I mean, look at the utter, utter bullshit about collaboration with fans on this new badge, then the rubbish about binning the old new one after a year.

It's fundamentally untrue, so not sure why they'd tell us the truth about this.

[exigo]

Alexander stadium temporary seating took it to 40k capacity during the games. Even putting in temp seating squared off to the pitch would be 35k comfortably.

I reckon the plan is for us to rebuild on the VP site, potentially trying to nudge the footprint towards the north if they can buy up the houses on Nelson Road. It then would be a Spurs approach, where that new ground starts while the old one is still in use – might even be half a season where we play at VP with 3 stands, before taking up a ground move while they finish the rest.

[pauliewalnuts]

Alexander stadium temporary seating took it to 40k capacity during the games. Even putting in temp seating squared off to the pitch would be 35k comfortably.

It's one thing having temporary seating with no cover against the elements, and full of people just sat around passively watching the athletics, but another entirely for something used for football, during winter.

[Villan82]

Yeah, Heck seems to have a Trumpian approach to the truth.

[PeterWithe]

If we were looking at scaling up not down they wouldn't be talking about there being 200 unsold seats, acknowledging that the waiting list is a bit of a farce (with most on it not having bought a ticket for 3 years plus) and spending the money on upgrading existing stands to try to squeeze in a few more seats.

Non of this signals bigger.  It all signals cuts.

Someone pointed out that, if you didn't want start a discussion on what the real plans were, but wanted to cancel the NS development immediately, then the 200 unsold tickets is a simple excuse close at hand. It doesn't stand up to too much scrutiny, but it doesn't have to, because in the grand scheme of things, a few hundred people on here dont matter.

[aev]

If we were looking at scaling up not down they wouldn't be talking about there being 200 unsold seats, acknowledging that the waiting list is a bit of a farce (with most on it not having bought a ticket for 3 years plus) and spending the money on upgrading existing stands to try to squeeze in a few more seats.

Non of this signals bigger.  It all signals cuts.

Someone pointed out that, if you didn't want start a discussion on what the real plans were, but wanted to cancel the NS development immediately, then the 200 unsold tickets is a simple excuse close at hand. It doesn't stand up to too much scrutiny, but it doesn't have to, because in the grand scheme of things, a few hundred people on here dont matter.

Fans probably just suck it all up, inelasticity of demand and all that.

Potential customers however would probably prefer an honest and coherent message.

[LeeB]

Maybe they need to be hush hush re potential new sites so they don't get usurped by Shelbyville holdings or whatever they're called, with that John Brady and the weird bloke off of X Factor.

[Ads]

All that time, effort and money to plan and submit for approval the new North Stand.

Then some tweaks, ie removing Villa Live. Then, one imagines, plenty of back and forth re the station improvements.

Then, a massive company with huge experience of media and stadiums / sports organisations becomes part owner of V Sports, in a move which the club described as about 'improving' infrastructure, AND IN THE VERY SAME WEEK Heck tells us that the North Stand rebuild is effectively cancelled.

I know they've said we're not moving etc etc but, tbh, I am now at the point where I don't trust much that Chris Heck says, and what's more, if we were considering moving or a new stadium - does anyone think they'd actually tell us that right now?

No, they'll say whatever they need to say to close the subject down so it doesn't become a distraction.

I mean, look at the utter, utter bullshit about collaboration with fans on this new badge, then the rubbish about binning the old new one after a year.

It's fundamentally untrue, so not sure why they'd tell us the truth about this.

Absolutely. No such thing as coincidences. It's a new build, whether on site or somewhere else in the city centre.

Saying we're not moving today means nothing for tomorrow when we might be. We had funding in place to rebuild the North. Why on earth would you need another £6bn fund unless you were going to go bigger? And why spend £100m to still be left behind by the inadequacies inherent to Villa Park.

New build all the live long day.

[Ads]

If we were looking at scaling up not down they wouldn't be talking about there being 200 unsold seats, acknowledging that the waiting list is a bit of a farce (with most on it not having bought a ticket for 3 years plus) and spending the money on upgrading existing stands to try to squeeze in a few more seats.

Non of this signals bigger.  It all signals cuts.

Someone pointed out that, if you didn't want start a discussion on what the real plans were, but wanted to cancel the NS development immediately, then the 200 unsold tickets is a simple excuse close at hand. It doesn't stand up to too much scrutiny, but it doesn't have to, because in the grand scheme of things, a few hundred people on here dont matter.

T'was I.

[LeeB]

I wouldn't go as far as saying it's certainly a new build but they're absolutely looking into it.

[eamonn]

Building a brand new ground at Villa Park means we'd have a long period where we wont have anywhere to play.  Spurs had Wembley, where would we go?

I was thinking about this. I know it'd be really shit for all concerned, but we might need to relocate to London for a couple of years. There's really nothing even vaguely local that will suffice.

That would never happen. Biggest local grounds are the Dogheads or Leicester at 32,000, which would at least accommodate all of our season ticket holders. The King Power will be 40,000 when they've finished the expansion. London is a two and a half dour drive with no traffic, which would easily become three hours plus if you factor in parking and getting to which ever ground it was. Trains wouldn't have the capacity or reliability at weekends to ship that many people down.

Before they plumped for Wembley, Spurs were considering using Milton Keynes which holds 31,000.

I think Sexual was being his playful self.

[eamonn]

It's not necessarily about corporate it's about GA+.  I believe the intention was for there to be a significant amount of GA+ seats in the new North.  I honestly think the take-up and attitude towards TV and LG has spooked them.

I keep seeing you use GA - does that mean General Admission (non-season ticket holders)? And what's GA+ ?!  I also keep thinking TV is referring to Toronto Villan and LG is Louis van Gaal. 2024 feels like it'll be a tough year for me.

[Chris Harte]

It's not necessarily about corporate it's about GA+.  I believe the intention was for there to be a significant amount of GA+ seats in the new North.  I honestly think the take-up and attitude towards TV and LG has spooked them.

I keep seeing you use GA - does that mean General Admission (non-season ticket holders)? And what's GA+ ?!  I also keep thinking TV is referring to Toronto Villan and LG is Louis van Gaal. 2024 feels like it'll be a tough year for me.

General Admission, for a seat, use of concourse facilities whether a season ticket or buying game to game.
GA+ is Lower Grounds/ Terrace View.

[PeterWithe]

It's not necessarily about corporate it's about GA+.  I believe the intention was for there to be a significant amount of GA+ seats in the new North.  I honestly think the take-up and attitude towards TV and LG has spooked them.

I keep seeing you use GA - does that mean General Admission (non-season ticket holders)? And what's GA+ ?!  I also keep thinking TV is referring to Toronto Villan and LG is Louis van Gaal. 2024 feels like it'll be a tough year for me.

Ah, see I didn't know that, I thought Id missed another name change to a suite at the ground