brommy

Fair enough but I still think we're chatting about something that's not going to be built at a time when something is very unlikely to happen.

As you wrote, I can't see an average fan price cap being introduced for home fans. However, if it were, wouldn't that encourage expansion as the only way to increase gate revenue? Kind of the opposite of what Heck's current plan is.

My mistake on the old badge 'prepared' omission. I'm a slightly overweight Villa fan of near 1000 games attended. Not sure if that's 'big' or not, but then I'm not looking to be judged. The AVFC, un-detailed pale yellow lion are enough for me to prefer the recent offerings, as I previously posted. I had hoped an explanation behind a different opinion would clear your amazement that some might prefer the crest with 'Aston Villa' and the detailed gold lion to the Lerner era 'AVFC' yellow lion crest you posted.

I'm really not a fan of the non detailed yellow lion and unedited, that crest normally has 'prepared' in a poor font. Also when 'Aston Villa' is great sounding and even has a good balanced look to it, why use AVFC? When I see that AVFC badge, I'm really not surprised the recent 'Aston Villa' with detailed gold lion on a shield got some 'it's okay' type comments. I clearly don't agree with your opinion but it doesn't amaze me that it's held.

Not sure if you're joking (particularly if you rate the Lerner AVFC badge!), but I'm not amazed that fans have differing opinions and I think I'm mostly accepting of them . In my opinion, on a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 is me actively protesting at Villa Park (down with this sort of thing) and 2 is emails to the club and complaining on fan forums. I'd mark the Lerner years AVFC blue & yellow badge as a 3; the 'copyright' badge is a 4 (it's as bad as the Lerner AVFC but gets an extra point for at least including the name of our club); the 'leaked' detailed gold lion crest images are a 5; the temporary round badge is a 6. It's a shame none are a 7+ in my opinion, but as previously stated, at least they're not 'can't shift this phlegm off my chest' leeedz style bad.

You're probably correct. I really was hoping the recent 'gold lion' crest images were legit as I think they're just on the right side of acceptable. Still, there's bugger all I can do about it so unless it's embarrassingly bad like the leeeedz 'chesty cough' debacle, I'll put up and shut up about it.

So is it definitely going to be the crest with the plain yellow lion with drop shadow and the subsequent chat about the images showing a somewhat improved crest with the detailed gold lion have been pointless?

Finally!

Zirkzee's not high on my list.

Chelsea had a full feasibility study in to the cost and benefits of expanding their current footprint at Stamford Bridge, adding around 14000 seats for a new capacity of 53000. The cost was approaching £20k per seat giving a break even period of 25 years, even at their high ticket and hospitality pricing. I'm guessing that's around twice the cost of a new North Stand but then our tickets and hospitality would need to be half Chelsea's prices to suit our fan base demographic. Chelsea have decided against the expansion or moving ground, which you correctly identified was also cost prohibitive. I expect NSWE have made a similar decision for us.

It happened in Manchester but I agree it is highly unlikely to happen again or here.

Governments leak possible future policy to see how much pushback is generated. It's possible Heck and co. did similar. IF those who don't like either/or the star and 1874, acknowledge the majority of fans surveyed wanted them, and we acknowledge that the round badge wasn't working as good brand recognition amongst all the other current round badges in top level football, do we think that the recent images showing a gold (not yellow) lion on a shield are decent and at least acceptable?

I couldn't borrow Durán's agent a tenner but I could lend it. Perhaps one for the 'Things that piss you off that shouldn't' thread!

Exactly my thoughts on what I believe is the primary reason for the cancellation of Phase 1. Every home game I take a look across the stands from my vantage point in the centre of the Upper Holte. Even sell out games will see single empty seats, perhaps 1 in 100, which is to be expected through illness/holiday or toilet visits (there's a bloke, who sits in the row in front of me, who makes 3 or 4 visits during every game!). The groups of seats visible without fans in the occasional not sold out games are always in the same areas - the very top corners of the Upper North and the very top corners, closest to the Holte, of the Trinity and D.E. stands. Those latter two areas are reserved for those without season tickets who have purchased hospitality in the Lower Holte. In a couple of games there's been an empty group of around 50 to 100 seats in each of those two areas. I fully expect Heck has done the return on investment maths (we can sell out another 8000 seats at season ticket prices of around £40/match but not at £60+/match or £120 with some hospitality) and presented his findings to NSWE. It will then have been NSWE's decision to choose not to replace the North Stand.

Surely it is an error on that website - perhaps they were awaiting confirmation of the VAR personnel? It was my understanding that all FA Cup games played at current Premier League grounds would feature full VAR coverage. Why would Stamford Bridge be any different this Friday evening?

Didn't her husband's family own the multi-billion pound pharmaceutical company?

Clearly not injured. Wouldn't be the first to throw a sickie to get a birthday off work.

That's a good sign to most!

I'm pleased Bertie kept his cool to score a decent penalty. Just one thing confuses me about that video clip - why does Jean-Paul Gaultier appear in it?

Sorry for your loss. I'm sure the VT community are here for you if you need us.

Still no news on the appeal against the red card for Calvert Lewin?

Yep. Shortbread can taste lovely made with all butter but cheap and nasty if made with another fat.

The result of a possible appeal will be interesting. After all, several VAR officials and the match referee viewed it several times and from various angles. All agreed it was a red, so an overturned decision will be saying they were all incorrect. Interesting if the PGMOL will 'throw them under the bus' for what is a subjective decision.

I agree. I strongly suspect the somewhat mediocre demand to pay the prices for the Terrace View and Lower Grounds hospitality offerings, has caused Heck to believe there isn't the money in the Villa fan base to pay for the new North Stand in what he and the owners believe is a reasonable timeframe. We've thousands of fans willing to fill a 50k Villa Park with their £40 per match season tickets. They might also give an extra £10 profit to the club by buying a pie and a pint (possible a bit more if the catering was more efficient!). Change those averages to £80 and £30 respectively and Heck would have already approved the construction start, but we've not got the numbers willing to pay 'London prices'.

Already posted but while it's being discussed, just to add some perhaps comparable detail (in terms of both being large Premier League clubs), regarding anticipated financial return - Chelsea very recently rejected the expansion of Stamford Bridge as their payback period was 25 years with just a 2.8% annual growth over a 50 year period. A significant difference from Villa Park was their cost per new seat was double the North Stand cost per new seat, but I also strongly expect Chelsea could charge around double for their tickets and hospitality.