Mazrim

2 hours ago, Stevo985 said:

That's an incredibly expensive way to support a bid to be a Euros stadium considering we almost certainly would have been one anyway

Didn't we have to commit to 52k to be a venue? May have imagined that.

3 hours ago, Lichfield Dean said:

Didn't come across as a joke!

You think anybody would seriously propose knocking down Aston Hall for a stadium?

11 minutes ago, mrchnry said:

This thread has lost the plot now. Talking about flattening a 400 year old building to extend our out of date stadium. 

You realise it was a joke, right?

I wont lie, I'd have that black and red one.

2 minutes ago, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said:

I know I'll get laughed out the room ( Probably rightfully so )

However, for some reason... The Scum getting a new " Super Stadium " kind of worried me further about getting " left behind ".

I had a nightmare about the parallels between Man United and Man City. 

Us OBS being Man United in the example, becoming complacent, disregarding the " noisy neighbours" ( As we are way too big, established and far ahead ) so viewing them as no threat until it was too late .

 

Its not irrational. They can be as shit on the pitch as you like but if their off-field game improves and they eat into our potential, it will be a mistake.
I think a few people are massively underestimating the revenue potential of a large modern stadium in Birmingham.

16 minutes ago, DakotaVilla said:

It’s owned by the bankrupt council is it not?  

Exactly. We can name our price

The hall itself can be incorporated as a Jacobean themed restaurant on the south concourse.

Lots of belters too.

That logo looks terribad. Good luck Adidas.

1 minute ago, Caravella82 said:

I agree but if Kaine Kesler Hayden is having to thumb a lift I worry about cost cutting in other areas!

They have Viagra for that now.

 

The days of average players going for 40-50m are over. FFP is hammering clubs now and they'll be more canny with their brass.

35 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

Given the cost of building a new stadium and creating the infrastructure to support it - I think the option of buying up houses around Villa Park for a third of the price and expanding where we are probably makes better sense.

Although we're not, as we're not currently looking at major expansion, we're looking at increased yield.

It would depend on how its financed and also if its even possible to support the logistics of expanding VP. The extra traffic, parking, rail etc. A new stadium might be easier to find sponsorship for, not only commercially but from the government / lottery. And yes, buying up property around VP would be a cheaper option in the short term for sure, but if its not fit for for purpose in 10 years because we need to expand again and have maxed what's possible at VP, we'd have the same issues.

I'm not saying don't do the expand VP option, just that it might be best to start from scratch in the long run. Patch the roof vs new roof.

Regarding your second point. If we're not currently looking at major expansion, how does the club intend to compete with other top clubs financially if a significantly larger stadium isn't in the plans? And what was the point of the architectural designs and declared plans to expand to 53k?
How does it intend to satisfy the clear demand for extra tickets? Increasing the yield without expanding the stadium means what exactly? Just better commercial partnerships, a few extra seats from a rethink layout, and increasing ticket prices? Great, but that won't nearly be enough.

5 minutes ago, omariqy said:

9 cup finals. Here we go. Anyone else buzzing?

Bring it on.

3 minutes ago, chrisvilla4 said:

Gambling shenanigans aside (which is/ has been seemingly conveniently ignored) would anyone here swap Toney for Watkins? Essentially, that's what Brentford did. 

No chance.

2 minutes ago, bickster said:

It doesn't matter, the times are still similar and most WCML trains do not go through Brum. The point isn't about the exact times though in my experience those times are more or less correct. Liverpool is almost as close to London in travel time as it is the Birmingham. Shall I drive to Birmingham - 2 hrs or get the train to London - just over 2hrs. The point is that Birmingham will never replace London as an event destination no matter how much Birmingham exceptionalism you apply. The sheer mountain of industries you'd have to change to achieve that is insurmountable. Birmingham would obviously get a few events, it already does, a new stadium increased capacity stadium with multi roles isn't going to change that. The versatility would be wasted money. Birmingham already has the NEC for a very large, well connected high capacity indoor venue, it doesn't put on that many events of the nature we're talking about

OK, so here's my summing up as I don't want to labour it any more. I work in events, I know how dominant and important London is, and rightly so.

Birmingham isn't going to replace London as a destination but the one thing that holds us back is the lack of a viable venue. We can do the 5-30k no problem, but nothing larger.
Therefore a large stadium would absolutely make a big difference. And I'm sorry but as far as a choice of getting from Liverpool or Manchester to Birmingham or London being of no difference is just nonsense.
On average its an hour difference by train, that's each way, so 2 hours or more on your day. And loads of people prefer to drive because trains are unreliable and overcrowded, therefore the question is do I drive and hour and a half or 2 hours to Birmingham or 3 or 4 hours to London? Or add an hour each way by coach at least. And what about other places like Nottingham, Bristol, Sheffield etc? This is absolutely considered by event organisers

We've been crying out for a large stadium in the midlands for years and this could be the perfect opportunity. Only Aston Villa could justify it as a custodian.
 

2 minutes ago, bickster said:

Yes and that is on direct trains no changes LPL - LEU = 2hrs 15, LPL - BHM = 2 hrs

After some admittedly brief research and train journeys aren't a hill I want to die on, but average train time from Liverpool to London range from 2hrs 30 to 3 hours. LIverpool to Birmingham average 1 hour 35 to 1 hour 50. But like I said, this is just trains.

2 hours ago, The Fun Factory said:

And yet they aren't ambitious enough to build one new stand as they had second thoughts in being able to sell thousands of GA+ plus admission seats.

I don't think its any lack of ambition. Quite the opposite. A rethink over the North stand could just be to do with reappraising the project as a whole. I have no doubt at all that they want to improve capacity significantly.

11 minutes ago, LondonLax said:

I doubt a mid table Premier League club are going to spend big money on Cash, they will be looking for better value elsewhere. A top club is not going to come in for him and no club outside the Premier League will be able to afford his wages. 

In a nutshell.

2 minutes ago, bickster said:

It takes as long to get by train to London as it does to Birmingham from Liverpool. Pretty similar for most of those places. Birmingham is not currently on the West Coast Main Line proper and the speeds of trains on the West Mids rail network is vastly reduced. Now the 2nd leg of HS2 has been cancelled those services will now be further degraded in the future.

Sorry, are you saying it takes as long to get to London from Liverpool by train as it does to get Birmingham from Liverpool?
I know rail in the midlands could be better but that's not true is it? And not everybody travels by train.

3 minutes ago, GlobalVillan said:

In every realistic sense it already is.

Far more investment goes there, as well as media, tourism, and many other factors. 

As I say, globally, hardly anyone I ever meet has heard of Birmingham, especially outside of Europe.

Manchester is known by everyone. We all know why that is but it doesn't change the facts.

Sorry mate, I'm not having it. Manchester has a more famous football club, and thats it.

10 minutes ago, VillaChris said:

He's been part of some very good defensive units in his time here unless you think he's been nothing to do with that (despite being a regular in those periods).

I could see Chelsea being interested in him given Reece James endless injury woes. They probably need to sign more of his type as solid prem player than endless 19/20 year olds on 8 year deals.

No, of course he's been something to do with it. I'm not saying he's a bad player at all, I just think he's average and I very much doubt Chelsea will be after him.

3 minutes ago, GlobalVillan said:

I think the opposite. Its too far south to be northern and too far north to be southern.

Birmingham falls between 2 stools and Manchester is now the 2nd city and the "capital" of the north in every realisitc sense.

Manchester isnt the 2nd city. It never will be either.

1 minute ago, bickster said:

It really isn't, Birmingham is in London's catchment area. Broadstairs and Brighton for example are not in Birmingham's

And in reply I would say that London, Manchester, Liverpool, Bristol, Oxford, Nottingham, Sheffield, Leicester etc are all in Birmingham's catchment area.
There's also no point in keep talking about London. We're not building a stadium there, even theoretically, and if we were to build a new stadium of course we would look at all the ways to maximise revenue including national and international events because, whether you agree or not, Birmingham is very well situated for it. Case in point: the busiest Exhibition centre in Europe is there. What isn't there is a stadium big enough to host the kind of events being discussed. London has several, Manchester has 1, arguably 2.
 

45 minutes ago, Zatman said:

Fulham, West Ham hell he is an upgrade on United full backs. I think our fans massively undervalue our players compared to other teams

 

I certainly don't. I just think Cash in particular is a very limited player that won't attract major interest.

1 hour ago, bickster said:

London or Birmingham, London will win 99% of the time. Birmingham is an hour from London by train. Rapid cross country transport is Londoncentric.

This is actually a plus for Birmingham. Its close to London and the North West. Its the best location in the country for major / national events, we just don't have the right venue for it.