Villa Park Redevelopment

[chrisw1]

So have Nottingham Forest but they're not a helpful comparison either.

Forest have nothing like our and Everton's fan base.

They've had more success over the last 45/50 years than us or Everton. And yet - their situation tells us nothing about our own.

I was pointing to a similar level of success AND fan base.  I think Everton have that.  Forest and Leicester don't.

[Sexual Ealing]

So have Nottingham Forest but they're not a helpful comparison either.

Forest have nothing like our and Everton's fan base.

They've had more success over the last 45/50 years than us or Everton. And yet - their situation tells us nothing about our own.

I was pointing to a similar level of success AND fan base.  I think Everton have that.  Forest and Leicester don't.

If we agree on that (and we do), my next question is so what? Everton have a shit football team, chaotic ownership and a shiny new stadium. Right now we're in precisely the opposite situation.

[PeterWithe]

One thing I am definitely less sure of now than I was 12 months ago is that the club wouldn’t go down the line of trying to get CPO’s….i know it’s probably paranoia but when you have a clear uber-tw@ at the helm with zero humility he isn’t going to look at the moral and human issues with a decision like that

While I don't subscribe to the 'CPOs are inherently evil' point of view*, I do think the pros and cons of people having to move home for the expansion of a football club would need to be very carefully considered.

But where there is money there is a way and you are right, any moral aspect of this won't be taken into account by Chris Heck if it means he can hit his revenue targets. Potentially the political aspect of applying for CPOs would be one of the reasons that silence is maintained so that the anti-campaign won't kick off before they are ready to move.

* I really do believe society needs a mechanism where important, benefit-bringing projects can take precedence over current land ownership. Unfortunately in our dysfunctional society, the danger is that they are used merely to billionaires richer or keep politicians in jobs.

With Heck in charge I would be less worried about us going down the CPO route and more worried we go down the Liverpool route, of slowly purchasing any properties in the area that go on sale and allowing them to become derelict, eventually rendering the whole area a crime magnet and unihabitable for those who want to remain.

Open goal here for any Scousephobics?

[Dogtanian]

I don't see NSWE playing the patient slow-buying approach. If they do it, it will be a put the money in, hire the right people, and get it done approach we have seen on everything else.

[chrisw1]

So have Nottingham Forest but they're not a helpful comparison either.

Forest have nothing like our and Everton's fan base.

They've had more success over the last 45/50 years than us or Everton. And yet - their situation tells us nothing about our own.

I was pointing to a similar level of success AND fan base.  I think Everton have that.  Forest and Leicester don't.

If we agree on that (and we do), my next question is so what? Everton have a shit football team, chaotic ownership and a shiny new stadium. Right now we're in precisely the opposite situation.

New owners on the way.  When they designed the stadium they didn't intend to be shite.  Their owner funded the team heavily, just they wasted it on awful decisions.  The main difference between us is we got Emery. 

[Sexual Ealing]

They're still completely irrelevant to us though.

[cdbearsfan]

In any case, Everton's stadium is designed in such a way that it can be expanded to hold 62,000, if the demand is there.

[Dogtanian]

In any case, Everton's stadium is designed in such a way that it can be expanded to hold 62,000, if the demand is there.

Or pushed into the Mersey if they keep stinking out football.

[chrisw1]

One thing I am definitely less sure of now than I was 12 months ago is that the club wouldn’t go down the line of trying to get CPO’s….i know it’s probably paranoia but when you have a clear uber-tw@ at the helm with zero humility he isn’t going to look at the moral and human issues with a decision like that

While I don't subscribe to the 'CPOs are inherently evil' point of view*, I do think the pros and cons of people having to move home for the expansion of a football club would need to be very carefully considered.

But where there is money there is a way and you are right, any moral aspect of this won't be taken into account by Chris Heck if it means he can hit his revenue targets. Potentially the political aspect of applying for CPOs would be one of the reasons that silence is maintained so that the anti-campaign won't kick off before they are ready to move.

* I really do believe society needs a mechanism where important, benefit-bringing projects can take precedence over current land ownership. Unfortunately in our dysfunctional society, the danger is that they are used merely to billionaires richer or keep politicians in jobs.

With Heck in charge I would be less worried about us going down the CPO route and more worried we go down the Liverpool route, of slowly purchasing any properties in the area that go on sale and allowing them to become derelict, eventually rendering the whole area a crime magnet and unihabitable for those who want to remain.

There's a middle ground.  Buy houses as they become available and let them out as responsible landlords.  If it comes to a point in 15-20 years time when we want to develop then maybe we'll already own 20-30% of the houses.  The downside is our intentions would probably come out which would push up prices.

[chrisw1]

In any case, Everton's stadium is designed in such a way that it can be expanded to hold 62,000, if the demand is there.

That is often quoted but I have read that it isn't really true.  They can only expand to that capacity if legislation on safe standing ratios is changed.  (I'm open to being corrected on this but I'm sure that's what I have read)

[Ads]

That's a woefully naive idea.

[chrisw1]

They're still completely irrelevant to us though.

Other than they'll be playing in a 53k seater stadium next season, will have a billionaire American owner like us AND have a similar history and similar fanbase for the last 40 years you mean? 

IF they can find a decent manager I think they'll be a very good case study on what income a 53k seat stadium can generate which will surely be of interest to our owners.  If they have any reasonable level of success on the field I suspect it will be more than Heck can squeeze out of VP.

[Ads]

If you want a middle ground you firstly recognise that you're a director of Aston Villa and your fiduciary duty lies with the best interests of Aston Villa and Aston Villa alone. We have zero interest in being a landlord and taking on repairing obligations or being kind to our neighbours for reasons that do not benefit Aston Villa.

If you want more land, you make every house on the area where you want to build a time sensitive offer of 130% of value, in a single payment- If accepted within 3 months. If accepted within a period longer, it reduces accordingly. You offer it publicly and collectively and let the residents pressure themselves into selling for market rate plus a significant lump sum. Aston is a transient neighbourhood. It's the first stop for many first generation migrants and it's demographics have ebbed and flow and will continue to do so. You lean into that and you get it done.

Or you move.

[chrisw1]

That's a woefully naive idea.

[Ads]

That's a woefully naive idea.

Original.

It would be amusing to watch Swaris face in particular as you raise the notion of improving income with a 15 to 20 year plan, that involves us assuming repairing and habitation improvement obligations, as well as general administration costs, of becoming a landlord. Talk about dim.