Villa Park Redevelopment

[Dante Lavelli]

I can’t see it unless the Purlow stand fits better with the new financial rules.  Haven’t read them, but thought wages must be linked to turnover so cannot see how losing X,000 seats for a season would help that metric.

[Somniloquism]

In theory losing x amount of fans is covered for financially as you are allowed (or used to be allowed) to include an average of the turnover of the developed area for the financials. However I think from a footballing perspective Emery likes having the fans all around the ground for home games.

[PeterWithesShin]

I've yet to see a rule that definitively covers that, and even if it does exist for the PL with how strict UEFA are I can't see them doing it. Might be why hardly anyone here does a complete stand rebuild these days unless it's the only option like Fulham.

[Brazilian Villain]

In theory losing x amount of fans is covered for financially as you are allowed (or used to be allowed) to include an average of the turnover of the developed area for the financials.

Are we allowed to use FIFA prices when computing the average?

[Chris Harte]

In theory losing x amount of fans is covered for financially as you are allowed (or used to be allowed) to include an average of the turnover of the developed area for the financials.

Are we allowed to use FIFA prices when computing the average?

That'd be good. We'd definitely have more revenue than those over at the Twelve Dildo stadium.

[Stu]

Misshapes?

We'd like to go to town but we can't risk it.

I’ll acknowledge this one even if no one else will.

[Chip Butty 111]

In theory losing x amount of fans is covered for financially as you are allowed (or used to be allowed) to include an average of the turnover of the developed area for the financials.

Are we allowed to use FIFA prices when computing the average?

...Chris Heck says hi 👋

[Villan82]

There isn't time to do the Purslow plan before the Euros is there?

We'd still have two full summers if we wanted, either way we haven't much time

The Purslow plan involves demolishing the stand. The whole idea of the current design is for the stand to remain open during construction therefore reducing the loss in revenue and not having to play hugely important games with a building site behind the goal instead of fans. This is what's happening there's no chance of them reverting to Purslow design.

It was Percy, above, who said there was a whisper of a change of plan.

Yes, I understand why we are doing what we're doing but what happens  if we discover during the work that the old structure is unsuitable? I seem to recall we had a plan in the 90s to raise the old Trinity roof and add a tier but that got scrapped late on.

All hypothetical at the moment but  snags do happen. For what it's worth, I think the Purslow stand was to contain new dressing rooms among other things so it isn't beyond the realms of possibility that they could build a more simple stand, such as the one consented to this year, from scratch if they had to and in a faster time-frame.

[ian c.]

Misshapes?

We'd like to go to town but we can't risk it.

I’ll acknowledge this one even if no one else will.

Indeed. Well played.

[Sexual Ealing]

Do any of our builders, planners or general pointy heads know whether the new NPPF that was announced yesterday (and seems like a big step in the right direction for lots of Off Topic reasons) could have an impact on our ability to fuck around with Villa Park, i.e. the Witton Lane, for which planning regs have meant it's untouchable?

[Ads]

Specifically on light, the consultation deals with it more from the light pollution sense, but reaffirms they remain a consideration. Legally the position would be unchanged as those houses are >20 years old. The best option, if a new design would block that light, remains to purchase the 7 or 8 that it impacts. Or negotiate a settlement. In the context of a new build at £100m+ then a few extra million is not problematic.

[Sexual Ealing]

Thanks Ads.

[eamonn]

Misshapes?

We'd like to go to town but we can't risk it.

I’ll acknowledge this one even if no one else will.

Indeed. Well played.

If he also meant it in a "Villa should relocate to a central site but the obstacles are too many" way, then absolutely, it's a post of the year for me. If it's just his reliable, picking-up on Pulp, it's a solid seven.

[Sexual Ealing]

It's a reference to being unable to drink in town, as well as picking up on Pulp. It's not just deep, it's deep fried in Kelvin.