Villa Park Redevelopment

[Percy McCarthy]

Does this mean we can “add back” lost revenue? Risso was pretty sure we could do that for PSR, does anyone know if it works for UEFA SCR/FER?

[Percy McCarthy]

Anyway, a season of 37k capacity will possibly drive a season of 50k+ sell-outs in 27/28. World War III notwithstanding.

[Dante Lavelli]

Not a bad idea to drive up demand even further when the 50k becomes available.

PTV has been putting posts up about s.73 TPCA (spit), so suspect we'll likely amend the design.

They're for relatively minor and non material amendments so limited scope to change the scale.  You might squeeze an  extra

It's rarely anything major as S73 allows amendments without resubmitting. I assume it will be related to us starting major work sooner.

Agreed, it's limited to tweaks on what already has permission.  Subject to what was considered sensitive in the the original permission it could conceivably mean a slightly bigger stand given the transport hubs are being upgraded and less overloaded. 


Hmmmm

[Ads]

Not a bad idea to drive up demand even further when the 50k becomes available.

PTV has been putting posts up about s.73 TPCA (spit), so suspect we'll likely amend the design.

They're for relatively minor and non material amendments so limited scope to change the scale.  You might squeeze an  extra

It's rarely anything major as S73 allows amendments without resubmitting. I assume it will be related to us starting major work sooner.

Agreed, it's limited to tweaks on what already has permission.  Subject to what was considered sensitive in the the original permission it could conceivably mean a slightly bigger stand given the transport hubs are being upgraded and less overloaded. 


Hmmmm

Yeah I know, but that can mean a reversion to changes on Type A (Purslow) rather than Type B (Heck).

[Ads]

Anyway, a season of 37k capacity will possibly drive a season of 50k+ sell-outs in 27/28. World War III notwithstanding.

Yep said the same thing. Folks will be absolutely itching to watch the European Champions in our increased 50k VP.

[PeterWithesShin]

I'm far from convinced there's any "add back" if your revenue drops due to redevelopment. Could be that we've changed plans to have most of the work done while CL money covers the lost match day income.

[Percy McCarthy]

I'm far from convinced there's any "add back" if your revenue drops due to redevelopment. Could be that that we've changed plans to have most of the work done while CL money covers the lost match day income.

I wouldn’t say I’m ‘convinced’ either. ‘Not sure’ and ‘hopeful’ would be more accurate for me.

[Rigadon]

I wish they'd have told us they were announcing this so we could all have booked the day off work etc.

[LeeB]

I wish they'd have told us they were announcing this so we could all have booked the day off work etc.

Yeah, where were the teasers? Amatuers.

[Ads]

I wish they'd have told us they were announcing this so we could all have booked the day off work etc.

Yeah, where were the teasers? Amatuers.

I'd have parked working so much sooner if I'd have known.

[Trevthedog]

There is clearly a forthcoming change from the consented Heckstension scheme.

The official news release states:

'The redevelopment will also deliver substantial football infrastructure benefits, including the creation of approximately 500 square metres of new first-team changing, medical and physiotherapy facilities, alongside the upgrade of all player competition areas. '

This is not within the consented scheme. Something similar was in the Purslow Plans, situated around a new tunnel in the corner of the wraparound between the Trinity and the New North Stand.

Furthermore, from Tanswells article:

'The Athletic has seen copies of the redevelopment proposals' - this indicates there are new proposals which are not public domain.

'The new North Stand will wrap around into the neighbouring main Trinity Stand' - this was clearly not the case with the last heckstension.

Put the dots together - the design is changing again.

Can only assume they figured this was a bonus route they could go down by closing the stand.

[Ads]

That would mean a much bigger lower tier.

[ADVILLAFAN]

It's rarely anything major as S73 allows amendments without resubmitting. I assume it will be related to us starting major work sooner.

But can we add chimneys?

I wondered this. Assume they would be incorporated into the new roof design.

[VILLA MOLE]

I am confused ( not hard )so is it now being demolished  ?

[paul_e]

I'm far from convinced there's any "add back" if your revenue drops due to redevelopment. Could be that that we've changed plans to have most of the work done while CL money covers the lost match day income.

I wouldn’t say I’m ‘convinced’ either. ‘Not sure’ and ‘hopeful’ would be more accurate for me.

https://documents.uefa.com/r/UEFA-Club-Licensing-and-Financial-Sustainability-Regulations-2025/J.5-Relevant-investments-for-the-long-term-benefit-of-football-Online


The work itself is covered here:

Finance costs directly attributable to the construction and substantial modification of tangible assets

A licensee may adjust any finance costs that are directly attributable to the construction and/or substantial modification of tangible assets for use for the club’s football activities, provided the finance costs have been expensed in a reporting period rather than capitalised as part of the cost of the asset, up until when the asset is ready for use.

The amount that may be adjusted is the actual interest expense (not otherwise capitalised) less any investment income on the temporary investment of the amount borrowed in respect of which the interest relates. The relevant interest is from the date when the entity incurs expenditure for the asset, incurs borrowing costs and/or undertakes activities that are necessary to prepare the asset for its intended use or sale, until the asset is ready for use.

After completion of the construction and/or substantial modification of an asset, these finance costs can no longer be offset.

I don't see anything to definitely allow for any offsetting to account for lost revenue resulting from the work in that. If anyone else wants to take a look I may have missed something because my legalese is not perfect by any means and I've only skimmed what I thought might be the relevent sections.