Villa Park Redevelopment

[algy]

The massive blue Gottwald crane you see is the only one of that version in existence and its extremely in demand. this summer was the only time it was available, its literally booked up across Europe for  years. This is also a MAJOR driver for the 1 year accelerated timeline. Its takes 3 bloody days just to deploy the beast (its going to take the cross beam off the north stand in the coming week).

Well, I’ve learnt something I didn’t expect to learn today. Ta

[Pat McMahon]

^^ Comment under the YouTube video in response to someone who said it makes “zero sense” not demolishing and rebuilding:

It makes zero sense if you don't know anything about it sure. Let me educate you sir/madam.

Major utilities run beneath the North Stand,  not just for the whole of Villa Park, but for some of the surrounding buildings. A full demolition wouldn't just have meant knocking down concrete. It would have required diverting or protecting power, water, drainage, communications, obtaining approvals from the utility providers, carrying out the diversion works and only then could you begin demolition.
Doing the full build from scratch that way would take at least 2 years, risk of not completing in time for 2028 Euros.
The massive blue Gottwald crane you see is the only one of that version in existence and its extremely in demand. this summer was the only time it was available, its literally booked up across Europe for  years. This is also a MAJOR driver for the 1 year accelerated timeline. Its takes 3 bloody days just to deploy the beast (its going to take the cross beam off the north stand in the coming week).

So in summary
build around what you've got in 1 year = Common sense, financially lower cost, lower risk of not completing for Euro 2028
Knock down, start from scratch and build in 2 years = Not common sense, financially unsound, huge risk of not completing for Euro 2028

I hope that helps.

Cheers Percy, I haven’t been keeping up to date on this so appreciate the short explainer.

As a member and non STH I’m resigned to barely being at VP this season so.just want it done as quickly as possible

[chrisw1]

Notwithstanding that excellent explanation, there was time and we could have done it.  We chose not to.  It will still be a great stand.  But the cost is that we will top out at 50k whereas with a can-do attitude (and a lot of money) we probably could have got to 55k with the space we had and all the other ground tweaks and improvements.

So we're topping out at a capacity that Newcastle have found insufficient to fund a sustained top-6 push (without a generational manager).

People will talk about the Witton Lane.  That won't happen in time to support Emery.  The North could have.

Of course, whether we could regularly sell more than 50k tickets is another discussion.

[Dogtanian]

It's hard to compare because Newcastle and us swap Champions League year on year, but our matchday revenue was £10m above Newcastle's in the last set of published accounts.

We had Champions League that year, and they didn't, so it will be interesting how it works out last season when it was the other way round.

[chrisw1]

Yes, but my point is that Newcastle believe their stadium is holding them back.  We are building to that size.

[PeterWithesShin]

To get to 55k+ you'd need something bigger than the South at Spurs, which would mean no Euros, reduced capacity for another year and that's if a stand that size would work as the Witton and Trinity weren't built with the sightlines of a North that big in mind.

[chrisw1]

Yes, if we start now.  Not if we had started when we initially planned to.  It's water under the bridge and the stadium will look great.  But given the wealth of our owners, the restrictions of our site and our constant issues with revenue, I will always maintain it was a wasted opportunity.

[Percy McCarthy]

While it all helps of course, stadium capacity is only one aspect, 50k capacity doesn’t automatically exclude us from sporting success. Chelsea get sub-40,000 crowds most (all?) of the time, PSG about 48k.

[Ads]

Yes, but my point is that Newcastle believe their stadium is holding them back.  We are building to that size.

Eddie Howe and their recruitment holds them back.

[Dogtanian]

You are right, ChrisW, it would defo have been better long-term to build from scratch.

But the new North is supposed to add another £13m matchday revenue for us. Add that onto our last reported figure and that takes us to 10th for matchday revenue in the Money League. And that's without the other additional seating and the new hospitality bit they're adding between the Trinity and the Holte.

The teams above us would be Real Madrid, Barcelona, Man U, Arsenal, PSG, Liverpool, Spuds, Bayern, and Inter (just about). So not bad really, and certainly workable while we try to get our commercial side up.

[Brend'Watkins]

(its going to take the cross beam off the north stand in the coming week).

The sky will be busy with humming drones throughout this activity. They get excited by piling equipment, this will be off the scale.

[Ads]

3 days to set the crane up or something. This is proper nerdy boys stuff, love it.

[Dogtanian]

3 days to set the crane up or something. This is proper nerdy boys stuff, love it.

It cannot compete with the right spreadsheet, I think you'll find . 

[chrisw1]

Yes.  I think it is a pragmatic solution and the stadium will look great.  In truth, it's the solution Doug might have come up with.

I also think in the medium term we will look back and regret not making better use of the available land we had.  I think a rebuild of the Witton Lane is a pipe dream.

[Dogtanian]

Yes.  I think it is a pragmatic solution and the stadium will look great.  In truth, it's the solution Doug might have come up with.

There can be no harsher criticism.