Villa Park Redevelopment

[steamer]

it looks terrible now
As I watch most games on TV i asked a genuine (dumb) question a couple of weeks ago as to why the middle of the Trinity is always deserted for long periods after half time.
It looks terrible and does not boost the Aura of the crowd.
Put them under the TV cameras and out of sight.

[Nev]

The people with the least interest (and most money) get the best seats, it's the same at Wembley. It doesn't bother me, anyone watching will know that these are corporate areas and a necessary evil for Clubs.

[JD]

This could be yours for £2500 per person for the wolves game - only game still available this season.

https://www.mancity.com/hospitality/autograph?_gl=1*e3jgo5*_ga*MjA1NzE1MTM0Ni4xNzA5NzUxMzgy*_ga_83D496C6PL*MTcwOTc1MTM4Mi4xLjEuMTcwOTc1MTU3Ni41MC4wLjA.*_ga_QFRL9KTV4P*MTcwOTc1MTM4Mi4xLjEuMTcwOTc1MTU3Ni42MC4wLjA.

That's a lot of money to meet Paul Dickov.

[tomd2103]

I read somewhere that the types that do the corporate thing tend to prefer seats to the side of the pitch rather than behind the goal. This made me wonder whether the club were planning on doing a major rebuild with the Doug Ellis Stand before the North Stand (one that might require moving the road and purchasing of properties behind it). But then Dante's post about companies buying the tickets as a tax write-off rather than individuals makes a lot of sense, and makes me wonder a side-view or a behind-goal view really matter that much if you have the padded seats, five-course meal, free bar and haven't pulled the wedge from your own pockets.

I still don't think we're going to move though. Heck saying the original plan seemed to be "too much, too soon", as well as his assertion from the same interview that he "loves history" is enough to convince me of this.

Are we really trusting anything that comes out of Heck's mouth at this point?

[Villan82]

On that, assuming Ads is right in thinking it is a new stadium, how do we feel about Heck being the person in charge of that given what we have seen with the badge and the AV150 thing?!

[chrisw1]

On that, assuming Ads is right in thinking it is a new stadium, how do we feel about Heck being the person in charge of that given what we have seen with the badge and the AV150 thing?!

Why would you think ADS is right when a poster has heard directly from club's new head of Strategy and Analytics that one of the reasons the North Stand development got canned was their concern that they would not be able to sell enough premium seats? 

If they're binning a development that could transform our potential within two years because they don't think enough people have signed up to pay 60-70% more than standard ticket price for access to a purple concourse with neon lights, what makes you think they're planning to blow £1b on a new stadium? 

[Villan82]

On that, assuming Ads is right in thinking it is a new stadium, how do we feel about Heck being the person in charge of that given what we have seen with the badge and the AV150 thing?!

Why would you think ADS is right when a poster has heard directly from club's new head of Strategy and Analytics that one of the reasons the North Stand development got canned was their concern that they would not be able to sell enough premium seats? 

If they're binning a development that could transform our potential within two years because they don't think enough people have signed up to pay 60-70% more than standard ticket price for access to a purple concourse with neon lights, what makes you think they're planning to blow £1b on a new stadium?

Sorry mate. To clarify, I think they aren't building a new stadium and I am basing this off the very post you refer to.

But until I read that post I wasn't sure as the new investment, heck's background, the Birmingham Mail debate had led me to think it could be on the cards.

Why we are standing still is beyond me though, these people are surely smarter than and see that standing still is like tying an anchor to this club.

[LeeS]

A side-on view is miles better than behind the goals, not even close. Especially for the profile of people who use those corporate seats, who just want it to look exactly like it does when they're watching it on telly.

That's a bit of a stereotype. Every time I've been to a sporting event on corporate I've only ever been there with people who really enjoy the sport. People who aren't into football don't bother giving up their spare time (weekends especially) for a couple of free beers, a plate of sarnies and some boring business chat. Your point about the difference in view from behind or the side is spot on though. I've always had my STs on the half way line for a good reason.

[Mister E]

On that, assuming Ads is right in thinking it is a new stadium, how do we feel about Heck being the person in charge of that given what we have seen with the badge and the AV150 thing?!

Why would you think ADS is right when a poster has heard directly from club's new head of Strategy and Analytics that one of the reasons the North Stand development got canned was their concern that they would not be able to sell enough premium seats? 
If they're binning a development that could transform our potential within two years because they don't think enough people have signed up to pay 60-70% more than standard ticket price for access to a purple concourse with neon lights, what makes you think they're planning to blow £1b on a new stadium? 

There's a logic in what you say, Chris.
However, I've been considering the context from which Heck has come: his experience (along with that of Edens) is likely to be of new-build, multi-purpose arenas targeting corporate customers, merchandise-sales maximisation and with excellent access for quick arrival / departure. His thinking is therefore likely to have been pretty much set soon after arriving here: the stadium is not fit for the purpose of maximising revenue; all that he's done since arriving has been to 'make-do-and-mend'.
With the introduction of the new investors - with their stadium-development expertise - I can see them (Heck and the new investors) making a compelling case to the owners and the local authorities for a new-build: get what we can from VP whilst building a new place somewhere linked to HS2.
The gamble is: if they can assure themselves of good European competition and high Premier League placings for the next few years, the revenue will grow during the new build and then hit warp-drive after we've moved. If they can identify a site which the planning authorities and local councils see as 'easy to approve', it could be done in 5 years (it's taken Everton - what? - 3 years following planning-approval).
I look at Wham and their move to the Olympic stadium: they seem to have almost doubled their attendance compared with Upton Park, just by moving to a more accessible stadium with better services. And - yes - it's in the Capital, but they're hardly the most successful team in the area. Citeh have done likewise (albeit with the success to bring in new fans). Even places like 'uddersfield, Derby and Bolton have - I suspect - improved their revenues (and probably attendances) from having built new stadia over the last 25-30 years.
There is a question in my mind about how much VP would be worth if sold and to what purpose it would be put subsequently, and I'm not necessarily arguing for a new stadium from a personal perspective, but I can see it happening at our club.

[Risso]

On that, assuming Ads is right in thinking it is a new stadium, how do we feel about Heck being the person in charge of that given what we have seen with the badge and the AV150 thing?!

Why would you think ADS is right when a poster has heard directly from club's new head of Strategy and Analytics that one of the reasons the North Stand development got canned was their concern that they would not be able to sell enough premium seats? 
If they're binning a development that could transform our potential within two years because they don't think enough people have signed up to pay 60-70% more than standard ticket price for access to a purple concourse with neon lights, what makes you think they're planning to blow £1b on a new stadium? 

There's a logic in what you say, Chris.
However, I've been considering the context from which Heck has come: his experience (along with that of Edens) is likely to be of new-build, multi-purpose arenas targeting corporate customers, merchandise-sales maximisation and with excellent access for quick arrival / departure. His thinking is therefore likely to have been pretty much set soon after arriving here: the stadium is not fit for the purpose of maximising revenue; all that he's done since arriving has been to 'make-do-and-mend'.
With the introduction of the new investors - with their stadium-development expertise - I can see them (Heck and the new investors) making a compelling case to the owners and the local authorities for a new-build: get what we can from VP whilst building a new place somewhere linked to HS2.
The gamble is: if they can assure themselves of good European competition and high Premier League placings for the next few years, the revenue will grow during the new build and then hit warp-drive after we've moved. If they can identify a site which the planning authorities and local councils see as 'easy to approve', it could be done in 5 years (it's taken Everton - what? - 3 years following planning-approval).
I look at Wham and their move to the Olympic stadium: they seem to have almost doubled their attendance compared with Upton Park, just by moving to a more accessible stadium with better services. And - yes - it's in the Capital, but they're hardly the most successful team in the area. Citeh have done likewise (albeit with the success to bring in new fans). Even places like 'uddersfield, Derby and Bolton have - I suspect - improved their revenues (and probably attendances) from having built new stadia over the last 25-30 years.
There is a question in my mind about how much VP would be worth if sold and to what purpose it would be put subsequently, and I'm not necessarily arguing for a new stadium from a personal perspective, but I can see it happening at our club.

The site at Bramley-Moore Dock was first agreed as the favoured site in January 2017, 7 years ago. If everything goes to plan, they're going to use it from Aug 2025, 8 and a ½ years later. That's the realistic time frame for a new stadium when you take in site identification, compulsory purchase orders, public consultations, having plans drawn, gaining planning permission, and then building. Especially in an area as congested as Birmingham, it's not going to be easy. We haven't even mentioned the possibility of a site yet, and Everton were looking for years before that. We'd be looking at 2032 at the earliest, if we were starting now, which we're not.

[LeeB]

On that, assuming Ads is right in thinking it is a new stadium, how do we feel about Heck being the person in charge of that given what we have seen with the badge and the AV150 thing?!

Why would you think ADS is right when a poster has heard directly from club's new head of Strategy and Analytics that one of the reasons the North Stand development got canned was their concern that they would not be able to sell enough premium seats? 
If they're binning a development that could transform our potential within two years because they don't think enough people have signed up to pay 60-70% more than standard ticket price for access to a purple concourse with neon lights, what makes you think they're planning to blow £1b on a new stadium? 

There's a logic in what you say, Chris.
However, I've been considering the context from which Heck has come: his experience (along with that of Edens) is likely to be of new-build, multi-purpose arenas targeting corporate customers, merchandise-sales maximisation and with excellent access for quick arrival / departure. His thinking is therefore likely to have been pretty much set soon after arriving here: the stadium is not fit for the purpose of maximising revenue; all that he's done since arriving has been to 'make-do-and-mend'.
With the introduction of the new investors - with their stadium-development expertise - I can see them (Heck and the new investors) making a compelling case to the owners and the local authorities for a new-build: get what we can from VP whilst building a new place somewhere linked to HS2.
The gamble is: if they can assure themselves of good European competition and high Premier League placings for the next few years, the revenue will grow during the new build and then hit warp-drive after we've moved. If they can identify a site which the planning authorities and local councils see as 'easy to approve', it could be done in 5 years (it's taken Everton - what? - 3 years following planning-approval).
I look at Wham and their move to the Olympic stadium: they seem to have almost doubled their attendance compared with Upton Park, just by moving to a more accessible stadium with better services. And - yes - it's in the Capital, but they're hardly the most successful team in the area. Citeh have done likewise (albeit with the success to bring in new fans). Even places like 'uddersfield, Derby and Bolton have - I suspect - improved their revenues (and probably attendances) from having built new stadia over the last 25-30 years.
There is a question in my mind about how much VP would be worth if sold and to what purpose it would be put subsequently, and I'm not necessarily arguing for a new stadium from a personal perspective, but I can see it happening at our club.

The site at Bramley-Moore Dock was first agreed as the favoured site in January 2017, 7 years ago. If everything goes to plan, they're going to use it from Aug 2025, 8 and a ½ years later. That's the realistic time frame for a new stadium when you take in site identification, compulsory purchase orders, public consultations, having plans drawn, gaining planning permission, and then building. Especially in an area as congested as Birmingham, it's not going to be easy. We haven't even mentioned the possibility of a site yet, and Everton were looking for years before that. We'd be looking at 2032 at the earliest, if we were starting now, which we're not.

They had at least another two sites I think in proposal, one of them where the Echo arena now is before that as well, I think the whole thing has been 20 odd years in total.

[Villan82]

The frustrating thing about the North Stand is we were originally meant to start in May 2023. It then got delayed by 12 months and then cancelled!

In theory, as we sit in the top four right now, we could have had the new stand already half built if we had been able to stick with the original plan. Instead we look set to keep with a stand that is simply inadequate.

And in the unlikely event they really are concerned about demand, do they not see that operating with a reduced capacity while it is built will mean there is a pent up demand ready for when it is finished and that would probably guarantee it sells out for a year or two regardless of how things are going.

These are just poor decisions. Simple as.

[chrisw1]

That's a good post Mr E and of course you may be right.  My sense is Heck has bottled it and is gambling on there being more demand and more chance of a slam-dunk success once Emery has got us competing in the Champions League.  I imagine we'll relook at the North Stand in 4 or 5 years.  Of course by then Emery will probably have left or be winding down and we'll have missed this opportunity to grow with a generational manager.   All because Heck is chucking his toys out the pram because we won't pay £150 quid for free hotdogs.

[Risso]

They had at least another two sites I think in proposal, one of them where the Echo arena now is before that as well, I think the whole thing has been 20 odd years in total.

Very true, the plan was going to be Kirkby for a long time, just off the M57/East Lancs road. And if you think the area around Goodison is bad, you've obviously never been to Kirkby or Knowsley! Christ. The firm I worked for had clients there, and you absolutely dreaded going out to that neck of the woods. Once client was a newspaper distributor for the Liverpool area, and so carried a large amount of cash. They had at least 3 armed robbery attempts that I knew of, including one where one of the directors was actually shot at in his car.

[Chris Harte]

I read somewhere that the types that do the corporate thing tend to prefer seats to the side of the pitch rather than behind the goal. This made me wonder whether the club were planning on doing a major rebuild with the Doug Ellis Stand before the North Stand (one that might require moving the road and purchasing of properties behind it). But then Dante's post about companies buying the tickets as a tax write-off rather than individuals makes a lot of sense, and makes me wonder a side-view or a behind-goal view really matter that much if you have the padded seats, five-course meal, free bar and haven't pulled the wedge from your own pockets.

I still don't think we're going to move though. Heck saying the original plan seemed to be "too much, too soon", as well as his assertion from the same interview that he "loves history" is enough to convince me of this.

Are we really trusting anything that comes out of Heck's mouth at this point?

You're possibly right, but if we are going to build.a new stadium then you have to wonder how big it would be. If Heck was thinking we can be more ambitious then why didn't he say so? It's a good look that would appease the fans. Instead, he said it's too much too soon, which has irritated/confused the fan base.

Given that saying "we're cancelling the North Stand because we can go bigger and better" would have been the thing to say new stadium, why did he say "too much, too soon "? It points to either a lack of foresight or a reaction to the LG/TV. It doesn't say new stadium to me.