Next FAB meeting

[UK Redsox]

Still find it annoying that they won't give a straight answer to questions about which sections are affected by the '900'.

[UK Redsox]

I'm so glad I got my season ticket before there was a queue.  I think I'd struggle for motivation as a casual supporter, particularly if I was looking at a spending decision of £65-70 for most games and knowing I'd never get a seat in the Holte.  The thought of trying to introduce kids to the club would seem pointless when the chances of getting seats together would be almost nil.

I agree. Fortunately we have had STs for years, but it's becoming almost impossible for any new people to get a season ticket.

The only viable way to introduce new family members is to share out the existing STs for those who have them, but the club are always trying to clamp down on that as well.

The move to compulsory digital season tickets will be a major hindrance to ST sharing, even within families.

[Somniloquism]

Interesting the amount of work on the Warehouse is over a year? Seems long for what is essentially an interior change.

[Rudy Can't Fail]

Still find it annoying that they won't give a straight answer to questions about which sections are affected by the '900'.

Yup, as I said, very Sir Humphrey Appleby. The whole thing also reminds me of how some US corporations deal with the unions, i.e. we really don't want to but as we must..tell them as little as possible, they can't be trusted. It's such a shame they choose to ignore the opportunity of good communication with the fans. It also has me thinking was that Heck success story about his time at Philadelphia engaging with the fans from Day 1 was just a personal PR exercise?

[Risso]

So, FAB correctly bring up that the facilities in the North are a load of shite, to which they reply:

"It is an old building and therefore comes with some insurmountable challenges."

Which is exactly why they were going to knock it down and replace it, you absolute set of fucking idiots!

[Villan82]

So, FAB correctly bring up that the facilities in the North are a load of shite, to which they reply:

"It is an old building and therefore comes with some insurmountable challenges."

Which is exactly why they were going to knock it down and replace it, you absolute set of fucking idiots!

Indeed.

Like, honestly. We have seen the ups and downs. if they continue on this path and, for whatever reason, things take a downward turn on the pitch (we know from bitter experience in the 90s, 00s, 2010s this can happen in football!) the Heck approach will have driven away people through price increases and mucked up a chance to get the next generation hooked on going every week.

My attitude is we can't get the brilliance of the football side cloud our judgment about how badly things off the pitch have been going. Because one day they might not be going well on the pitch.

And the damned North Stand will still be there!

[chrisw1]

Interesting the amount of work on the Warehouse is over a year? Seems long for what is essentially an interior change.

It's remarkable.  It would be disappointing if it took that long to knock a building down, clear the site and rebuild it from scratch in that timescale, let alone a bit of a refurb.

[Dogtanian]

It's going badly off the pitch for Everton, it's going well for us - we're just not happy that some things aren't being done the way we want.

The thing with the stadium is that they've had a choice - spend £100m and increase revenue in 2 seasons time, or spend a fraction of that, and increase revenue starting in August. They've chosen the latter.

As soon as it gets to the point where the gains from doing things like this are too little they will have to deal with the stadium itself. But until then, it's perfectly understandable that they took this decision, even if personally we might have fancied biting the bullet now.

Most of the other stuff, the badge, the lion, the way announcements are made, are often mountains out of molehills. And the stuff that is big - pricing people out, chasing the GA+ and hospitality revenue at the cost of lifelong match-goers - is pretty much the football landscape and where it's been heading since the early 1990s.

Catering, people should definitely swing for the catering.

[Drummond]

These responses are why the club will probably hate doing the FAB meetings. Every minor detail gets picked over, complained about etc. I'm not saying people are wrong to have the concerns they do, but it's no wonder the club want to ratify the minutes before they are sent out.

[Risso]

These responses are why the club will probably hate doing the FAB meetings. Every minor detail gets picked over, complained about etc. I'm not saying people are wrong to have the concerns they do, but it's no wonder the club want to ratify the minutes before they are sent out.

The club are required by Premier League rules to hold them, so whether they want to do them or not, or whether they find them useful or interesting is beside the point.

[Risso]

It's going badly off the pitch for Everton, it's going well for us - we're just not happy that some things aren't being done the way we want.

The thing with the stadium is that they've had a choice - spend £100m and increase revenue in 2 seasons time, or spend a fraction of that, and increase revenue starting in August. They've chosen the latter.

As soon as it gets to the point where the gains from doing things like this are too little they will have to deal with the stadium itself. But until then, it's perfectly understandable that they took this decision, even if personally we might have fancied biting the bullet now.

As I've said before, it's such a short term way of looking at things. Even if they'd gone ahead with the North Stand project, there was absolutely nothing stopping them increasing the number of premium places in the other three stands, so it's not a choice between doing one or the other. Then in two years time they'd have had a whole new stand with 10,000 more places to have as many expensive corporate and GA+ tickets as they like. We'd then have had tens of millions of pounds more income in that year, and every year thereafter.

[Dogtanian]

As I've said before, it's such a short term way of looking at things. Even if they'd gone ahead with the North Stand project, there was absolutely nothing stopping them increasing the number of premium places in the other three stands, so it's not a choice between doing one or the other. Then in two years time they'd have had a whole new stand with 10,000 more places to have as many expensive corporate and GA+ tickets as they like. We'd then have had tens of millions of pounds more income in that year, and every year thereafter.

I do agree, but there's something else being factored in somewhere.

If I'm cynical, I could easily imagine Chris Heck has been given a revenue target and a deadline to achieve it by, with a tasty bonus attached to hitting it. In this scenario, he wouldn't be eager to knock it down if it hinders his short term objective.

But I just can't see him getting that decision past the owners without a really good business case. And as you point out, a few more GA+ seats is not a good business case for it.

I keep thinking that it has something to do with the Doug. Part of me wonders if they have looked at that and realised there is very little more that can be done with it and it needs to go. Especially as halfway line seats are typically the most expensive and therefore a huge missed opportunity.

The New North was going to be integrated with the Trinity. If they knock down the Doug, I suspect they would also want to integrate that with the North.

So I do wonder whether or not they're going back to the drawing board because they need to have a plan in place for the future of the Doug, but with the space limitations that's a much trickier thing than the North.

[Drummond]

There's no way that the owners would let Heck can the North so that he could prop up his bonus.

[chrisw1]

Well if they are going back to the drawing board and intend for it to involve the Trinity it won't be in Emery's timescale at the club.  And probably not soon enough for the owners to see the long-term benefits either given their ages.

I think the best we can now hope for is a new North Stand development to start right after the Euros, but even that seems unlikely as things stand.

[Risso]

As I've said before, it's such a short term way of looking at things. Even if they'd gone ahead with the North Stand project, there was absolutely nothing stopping them increasing the number of premium places in the other three stands, so it's not a choice between doing one or the other. Then in two years time they'd have had a whole new stand with 10,000 more places to have as many expensive corporate and GA+ tickets as they like. We'd then have had tens of millions of pounds more income in that year, and every year thereafter.

I do agree, but there's something else being factored in somewhere.

If I'm cynical, I could easily imagine Chris Heck has been given a revenue target and a deadline to achieve it by, with a tasty bonus attached to hitting it. In this scenario, he wouldn't be eager to knock it down if it hinders his short term objective.

But I just can't see him getting that decision past the owners without a really good business case. And as you point out, a few more GA+ seats is not a good business case for it.

I keep thinking that it has something to do with the Doug. Part of me wonders if they have looked at that and realised there is very little more that can be done with it and it needs to go. Especially as halfway line seats are typically the most expensive and therefore a huge missed opportunity.

The New North was going to be integrated with the Trinity. If they knock down the Doug, I suspect they would also want to integrate that with the North.

So I do wonder whether or not they're going back to the drawing board because they need to have a plan in place for the future of the Doug, but with the space limitations that's a much trickier thing than the North.

In which case I really can't see the issue in saying that. Nobody's going to argue too strongly with a statement along the lines of:

"Having analysed plans for the future of Villa Park in more detail, it is now apparent that the Doug Ellis Stand is also dated and has poor facilities. We'll therefore pause plans for the North Stand redevelopment to ensure that they allow for redevelopment of the Doug Ellis stand, whether at the same time or more likely, at a later date. Our long term objective remains to have a Villa Park that offers fans the best experience in the Premier League, and provides Unai Emery with the backing required to challenge at the top of the Premier League and in Europe blah blah blah."