allani

I'd maybe drop the second part of the question. Not because I am not intrigued by the answer - but because it might mean that the answer to the first part gets "hedged". Asking about the new directors, their skills and previous experience might (or might not) reveal some insight into why they've been brought in. By asking directly why they've been brought in (especially if there are any commercial or contractual implications to starting a rumour about major works in the pipeline) we might just get a more political response.

I think that's the ideal solution - it means we don't lose any revenue by closing stands, we can make better decisions without being constrained by what is already there and we remain in Aston. I'd also like to see us use a lot of bricks as well - so that the beauty / history of (parts of) VP are not completely cast to one side.

No worries. I agree with the above. I just think NSWE are ever so slightly better than the Conservative government and so less likely to be running round in circles making u-turn after u-turn.

As I said in the post that you've part quoted. The question I asked about that exact possibility were - how can we do that in a way that doesn't adversely impact on our revenues? Can we afford to have 1 or 2 stands closed or partially closed for 3 or 4 years (given that it isn't just the NS that needs updating) with reduced attendances? Is there somewhere else that we can play - like Spurs did - whilst we redevelop the existing site? Can we acquire enough land in Aston to build a new stadium whilst still playing at VP?

Did they categorically say that? I thought it was more like "we have no plans to move" (but I could well be completely wrong ). Which is a very different statement. Plenty of clubs categorically state that the position of their manager is not in question before losing, sacking said manager and recruiting a replacement within a period of time that suggests that they'd already decided who they were going to approach.

Are they? Handbrake turns implies that it is all chaotic. It might just be that the owners are reacting to the fact that we've gone from challenging for 14th to 4th in a short period of time. We've been able to recruit one of the best managers, coaching teams and recruitment teams in the PL. And as a result we've seen "the best sponsorship deal" we could hope to attract be trebled AND our shirt manufaturing deal more than quadruple. So rather than making handbrake turns - maybe they've just been able to release the handbrake and make their plans more ambitious.

It wasn't that long ago that the owners said that their priority was winning promotion. Then they said that their priority was staying up. It is possible that 3 years ago they had no plans to move. It is possible that 12 months ago they had no current plans to move. It is also possible that now they are considering their options. In many ways it could also make sense for the owners to deny that they are planning on moving - for example, Villa signalling that they might be looking to build a new stadium would almost certainly impact on the price of property around the city. The recent appointments suggest that they are planning something and whilst that could be redeveloping VP - the big challenge to that is how we do that in a way that doesn't impact on our revenue figures in the short term? I don't think we can spend 2-3 years with one or two stands out of action and hit our FFP targets. I also don't think that there are many options for us to temporarily move to another 40,000 seater within a 45 min journey. Can we buy enough land around Aston to allow us to build a new stadium "on the same site-ish" whilst still using VP for matches in the meantime? Of course it is also possible that almost all the recent appointments coincidentally happen to have experience in big infrastructure projects and that they've been appointed just because they work well with our owners.

I think this is another example of NSWE targetting the best people they can think of to get the job done that they want to be done. It follows the pattern of Emery, Monchi and (I know so won't like this) Heck, etc. I think rather than lessening their impact it is only accentuating it. They're getting in the best they can to do specific jobs - so that they can spend their time plotting the bigger picture rather than worrying about the little / medium stuff. At least that's the impression it gives me. I've always said that you can tell how good a leader is by how good / strong their "deputy" or exec. team is. Good leaders tend to surround themselves with good people. Bad leaders tend to surround themselves with poor / weak people because they don't want to be shown up. It looks like we're building a pretty elite team on and off the pitch.

Aston Martin?

You missed out Coca-Cola.

And more importantly - Dave from next door isn't just Dave from next door. Dave's also widely regarded as one of the best in the business at what he does. It's a bit like living next door to Bill and asking him if he can help you with a little MS Excel issue you are having...

I am reading all of today's updates on the Board, etc whilst watching a replay of yesterday's match (Tielemans has just hit the bar and the post). I'm not sure which is giving me a bigger hard on!

I'm not sure that either of them will think that they've given anything up. I don't think this was about raising capital - it's about driving the club to the next level (however that happens). Atairos will be bringing something that makes it easier to get to a £1b valuation rather than a £500m valuation. So I think NS and WE will both be thinking that this deal makes the value of their personal investment worth more. They'll be thinking £s rather than %s.

As @OutByEaster? said - it's hard to believe that this is coincidental. It has the feel of something (big) happening. I don't think this is about rewarding people for their previous work by giving them a directorship of another company. It feels like they've been appointed to do something.

I'm sure it is going to be exciting. NSWE are showing that they are not here to make up the numbers. They seem to be ramping things up pretty rapidly.

Yeah - I should have said none of the new people (given that Atairos option makes sense as they've just become minority owners in VSports). The other names have come out of nowhere in terms of known official links to our club.

Yeah but none of those trusted people are sports / marketing people. They're all in infrastructure. It might be a huge coincidence - but it seems odd that their expertise is concentrated so much in one area...

There would be plenty of good reasons why they wouldn't admit to looking at potential venues for a new stadium. I am sure that the "cost" of sites capable of housing a PL stadium and all the services it requires would increase significantly if landowners in the area knew that Villa's billionaire owners were considering options. Much better to deny everything, put out some feelers from an apparently unconnected third party and try and get a full understanding of the actual value of each site prior to starting proper negotiations.

One big question mark over redeveloping Villa Park is how we can cope with 1, 2 (or more) stands being "out of commission" whilst the work is being done. It's hard (for me anyway) to think how we can maximise our match day revenue during redevelopment. If VP is redeveloped I think we have to be playing somewhere else in the meantime. But what other stadia in the area will support crowds of 40,000?

I think it is sometimes difficult to communicate as openly as we might like. There might have been all kinds of commercial, contractual or political reasons why the club weren't able to expand further on why the NS development was shelved. It might just have been **** poor communications. Or it might have been a **** decision. We will find out eventually. But I think this is another one of those - there are so many dots that can start to be connected that it seems hard to believe that it is just coincidence.

One thing that I noticed yesterday was that there were a couple of occassions when players made an error that put someone else under pressure - yet not once did that player berate his team-mate for losing possession or making a poor pass. The error was acknowledged, apologised for and then the team moved on. It's something that I think has been there most of the time (and is in direct contrast to what was happening under SG). I don't think I've seen a team as united/together for a long time. I mean I guess it is easy when things are going pretty well but it really does feel like most of the time we're playing as a team rather than 11 individuals. Mistakes happen. Sometimes we will concede as a result. But the way we play requires the opposition to press us in the hope of forcing a mistake and more often that not that allows us to spring an attack. It really feels like the team have really bought into that (even if not all the fans have yet) and so they are less worried about making a mistake and more focussed on trying to do something that will make the space eventually open up.

Was really impressive today. I think the 10 role suits him better than the left-sided midfielder. I get the feeling that he and Ollie could really click and link up brilliantly.

Rogers was superb today. Looking like an absolute steal of a signing.

I thought you hated our tactics........

Perfect performance. That second half was just insane. Played one of the best footballing teams in the league off the park. Could have won by 3 or 4.