andycv

2 minutes ago, The Fun Factory said:

Isn't  the warehouse going to be GA+ and the fan zone just some outside tents like the trinity area?

It just depresses me when I look at all of that space round the back of the north stand which has been screaming for redevelopment for nearly a quarter of a century and yet we keep kicking into the grass.

Anyway I am sure the cells will be lovely.

My understanding is that the Warehouse isn't GA plus - it will be open to everyone - likewise @OutByEaster? said the fan zone was an interesting proposition.  I'm disappointed about the North Stand - but we can't change the decision.

5 minutes ago, The Fun Factory said:

Are we? Or is it going to be just the GA+ areas? How are they are going to suddenly make the concourses bigger in the north stand for example?

The original plans were also to improve facilities in the trinity area as well and to make it all wrap up with the new stand which is now consigned to the history books. 

Extending a tired former BT 1960's telephone exchange is somewhat of a comedown with the original Villa Live plans, and then a new club shop in the new stand. Bare minimum.

Have you forgotten about The Warehouse and new Fan Zone?  

6 minutes ago, villa4europe said:

thats why i think the lower grounds etc could work, villa live would have been massive

spurs smash it, on the rare occurrence we have a Saturday 3pm kick off what if the club created a space where you could watch the early and the late kick off at VP rather than a pub in town? even if it was just a few hundred that did it

The new hospitality spaces, the Warehouse and the Fan Zone I think are our answers to these questions.

2 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

 

The majority of people at the game don't eat or drink there at all.

 

And this is what the club are focused on changing, I think.

2 minutes ago, Czarnikjak said:

Thanks for posting these numbers, appreciated.

There is one thing I would like to highlight however that most people miss in our calculations (including yourself by the looks of it).

The fact that we extended our accounting period, automatically increases our wages and amortisation (and some other costs) by 1/12, even if all other things were equal.

So you have there ~300m in wages+amortization, that extra month adds another £25m costs to your calculations.

I could argue some other minor points (like how did we keep amortization flat in your calcs, according to mine it went up by about £10m), but overall i still stand by my point that we are non-complaint as things stand atm (unless we sold Bodymoor or pulled some other accounting trick).

I am assuming that they extended the period because it helps with profit and sustainability.  My thinking is though we get the extra costs - we will add significantly more income to the pot too - so for example season ticket renewals, sale of Mogan Sanson, down payments from new sponsors, etc.  I just can't see anyway they would have extended if it made the calculation more difficult and not less.

The club have released an updated stadium seating map with the season ticket renewal information, which shows the new hospitality zones:

https://www.avfc.co.uk/news/2024/june/03/Season-Tickets-2024-25/

I think the main changes are B4 in the Trinity, M1 & 2 in the Doug Ellis and T5, R1 and R2 and R7 in the North Stand?

4 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

 

There's a lot of space between 'mindless applause' and 'open hostility' and it seems clear that the FAB should be somewhere in that space. Is there a particular reason to think that currently they are too far toward one end or the other? I don't really get what the beef is here. 

I think it is quite balanced from what @OutByEaster? has said - my observation was more on some posts here!

5 minutes ago, sidcow said:

Last time we showed trust in the ownership was Lerner and O'Neil. That ended well. 

Part of our job is to keep the ownership honest. They are transient, we are permanent. 

And I think that is part of the problem.  Distrust everything, everything is bad....  Engage with the club as if they are acting in bad faith, you'll get that in the end as they will feel their motives are being questioned unreasonably. Assume the worst, and the worst will happen!

1 minute ago, sidcow said:

If we want to compete with the top 6 (which we do) then parts of our stadium are old and small (for a top 6 stadium) 

And I would say the club recognise that and are trying to take short term action to close the revenue gap to keep up with the football team's progression on the pitch.  The FAB minutes recognise the North Stand is obsolete.

@Dale If you read what @OutByEaster? says, it seems to me like the club are keen to engage - I don't think they'd spend so much time and effort on it if they were just box ticking.  We as a fan group also need to think about how we approach this engagement.  If we are dismissive and critical, I would expect professionals to be defensive and seek to explain their decision making.

As a fan base I think we really need to show trust in the ownership - and therefore the management team on the business side they've put in place.  They have done nothing in the 5 years they've owned the club to warrant a lack of trust IMO and I honestly believe that they want what's best for us in the long term.  We should approach change in that way.

On 29/05/2024 at 18:10, OutByEaster? said:

Well...

There's a lot to get through and I guess one of the first things is about the tone of meetings - the meetings are certainly a lot more open than the notes are, there's often more discussion about the topics on the agenda with lots of small details that don't get added to the minutes that are discussed - more flesh on the bones as it were.

This meeting was up and down, there were some really positive moments and a couple that were slightly more fractious - but in general, you can speak your mind and Mr Hatton will endeavour to give you as much of an answer as he can. The key, and the reason (I think) to keep going is the hope that some things stick, that at some point someone in a club meeting elsewhere says "actually at the fans group meeting...." because something we said to them got into their heads - this isn't the more open group we had with Lerner, or the one given a little more play by Mr Purslow - this management group are unashamedly driven in their goal and their goal is increasing our revenue to help us win on the pitch - we can try to add some conscience to that, but they're clear that nothing will get in the way of it. That's football, we do what we can - and I like winning.

I think it's also important to recognise that we're a club doing really well, and in so many ways I've never been happier in my time as a fan, this ownership and their management team are a huge part of that and I think we have to frame everything around that while also remembering that ultimately it's their club, they're firing a lot of money into it and they have the right to make unpopular decisions if they think they're for the greater good.

5 minutes ago, thabucks said:

We know what can be done if the will is there with north stand but the biggest issue for me is the Witton and especially the frankly embarrassing upper tier concourse.

The plan shows how easy it would be to add an additional tier to the Trinity & remove that god awful sloping roof without impeding at all on capacity whilst it was being done. 

Where's this come from?  Interesting.

8 minutes ago, Risso said:

These Rules apply to any material changes to any aspect of a Club Crest (e.g. changing a colour from blue to red, adding or deleting text, or adding new design features and/or deleting established design features). These Rules are not intended to apply to the types of small changes to a Club Crest which occur more regularly, such as making a colour slightly lighter or darker, or slightly increasing or decreasing the size of a font.

Whilst there may often be a strong case for the modernisation of a Club Crest, given the prominence of a Club’s Crest on kits, promotional material, broadcast and other visual media, it is of vital importance that the views of supporters are given significant weight when deciding to make material changes.

It is noted that some Clubs mark anniversaries by introducing a club crest which draws on previous heritage but differs from that in current use by the Club. Whilst these Rules will still apply in such circumstances, Clubs will be given a greater margin of discretion with regard to a temporary change to a club crest of this nature provided that the change is for a maximum of one playing season.

This is interesting.

I suspect the club's argument is that the current badge is marking an anniversary (European Cup win) - and that the permanent changes to the badge are from the current shield one - and so the consultation undertaken covers that.

Certainly the response to the FAB suggests the FA have no problem with the change.

45 minutes ago, burchy said:

Tried to unwerewolf my earlier attempt at a lion refresh.

Would prefer something like this than the new Lerner badge we’ve got coming.

Let me know if it needs a drop shadow as I know many of you love a drop shadow…….Not!
 

Sorry but I don't like this very much.

26 minutes ago, Pongo Waring said:

When do kits normally get revealed? 

Not before 1 June I expect - our Castore contract runs to 31 May, I think. 

2 minutes ago, The Fun Factory said:

We were a utter mess at the time, it was basically a fire sale. They saw the upside thankfully or we could be in the championship or league one.

It shows how dreadful both Lerner and Dr Tony were as owners as they fail to add value to the club in an era of bucket loads of cash coming into the game.

I don't disagree with any of that.  Wes Edens actually said that he's an expert in buying distressed assets and turning them around.  Exactly the model that's been followed here.  Executing that in a sporting context is pretty impressive though!

That is madness when you consider how much they paid for us - £65m ish I think?

9 minutes ago, kidlewis said:

As our audience profile increases further and tickets are a lot rarer for games (as a non ST holder I rarely got opportunities for three tickets next to each other), we need to improve those value add packages for those fans wanting a (1-2) times a season visit.

if I could pay say £200 for two tickets and that guaranteed me a ticket plus some food and drink before and after the game and perhaps a shop discount code only for that day of use (encourage additional merch sales). I’d more than likely buy it. 
 

I can’t go to more than 5 games a year due to other commitments so a special trip with value add would be good. 
 

the current bolt ons they offer don’t come with a ticket, you need that first. That doesn’t work as that’s the hardest thing to get/purchase with demand. 
 

also a huge issue is almost all the hospitality is enquiry led, you can’t buy it online currently, which is a big friction point. 
 

they need to improve their inventory management and get as much hospitality bookable online for next season. 

I think the bolt ons do come with an option of getting a ticket - both the Lower Grounds and the Terrace View.

https://www.avfc.co.uk/premium/the-lower-grounds

The Lower Grounds can be purchased as a bolt-on to any existing season ticket around the ground to enhance your matchday experience or can be purchased on a single-match basis where your match ticket is included (Trinity Upper/ Doug Ellis Upper subject to availability).

Have I misunderstood?

14 minutes ago, Captain_Townsend said:

I can recall you posting at one point that you found it odd that infrastructure was clearly the area we needed to address to catch up woth the revenue of Spurs, West Ham and the more traditional leading clubs like Arsenal, Liverpool,  Man U etc.

It's easy to dismiss as impatience what is genuinely a concern for the medium term ability of Villa to compete at the top end with infrastructure not up to scratch and falling further behind and a lack of adequate explanation as to why we aren't pressing on with the major redevelopment we had planned. Great, we are doing some small scale works that will work short term - still the elephant on the room remains: how we going to bridge the revenue gap without major redevelopment?

I know why you're saying this - but I think the main reason why I'm not worried is I trust the owners of the club and the people running the business side.  They will be well aware of this and will clearly be seeking to address it.  I suspect the focus for this year has been sorting out the commercial deals and seeking to drive sponsorship income (clearly a quick win) - and sort Villa Park in the short term to increase revenue - and to be fair there's not much wrong with the Holte End and Trinity that can't be fixed.

The Aston Master Plan (which has been mentioned during the North Stand proposals) is what I think will set out the club's medium and long term ambition for Villa Park and the surrounding area for development - and that is what I think Atairos have come on board for.

So probably need to wait and see what the plan is (though it is frustrating!)

It is difficult to assess the proposals until we see something about the overall plan.  I am really hoping that the Fan Advisory Board will give the overarching approach and the detail, and the club will post the information soon after.

13 hours ago, OutByEaster? said:

Just on this picture, I reckon the temporary wooden plywood things at the top of the scaffolding might be an entrance - but I can't quite figure out where they link to. It's not the corridor from the Doug Ellis boxes, as I think that's inside the corrugated grey bit that links it to the North Stand  - is it the Upper Ellis Concourse? I guess it's possible there could be a requirement for an additional fire exit with the increased number of hospitality places I suppose. Any thoughts?

 

I think if it was going to be a permanent entrance/exit they'd need to apply for planning permission (as they have done with the changes to the shop) - so this must be temporary to enable the improvement work?

Interesting article here about the new badge, the wider rebrand and our approach to corporate partners: https://www.marketingweek.com/aston-villa-club-rebrand/

Quote

‘We’re cleaning it up’: Inside Aston Villa’s top to bottom club rebrand  

Fresh from qualifying for next season’s Champions League, Aston Villa is embarking on a complete club rebrand in a bid to go global.....

2 minutes ago, Captain_Townsend said:

The one thing abundantly clear in 2022 was that people wanted more claret.

 

I don't like claret on the badge.  Sorry!

9 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

The meeting on this didn't happen.

There were some preliminary discussions on season tickets at an earlier meeting but it was agreed that there wasn't time to get though those and that a specific meeting for them would be better, the club arranged that meeting but it was then canceled by the club and wasn't rescheduled.

 

Ok - my mistake.  Sorry @Davkaus

5 minutes ago, ender4 said:

If it was then i retract that statement.  But i thought the club postponed that meeting and then never re-arranged it?

@OutByEaster? will be able to confirm - but I am sure there was an informal last week or the week before.

5 minutes ago, ender4 said:

Yeah, they are simply lying aren't they.  

Similar to when they said that they have also consulted with FAB on the changes to the new new badge.

Not sure you can say that - there was an informal FAB meeting a week or so ago - perhaps it was discussed there?