dukes

4 hours ago, sne said:

We've spent huge sums on Championship players, huge contracts to aging players with no sell on value and it's all been very short sighted IMO.

Apart from Terry who are these aging players ? 

The squad contains 3 players over 30, Hutton, terry and Jedinak.

the large contracts given to Terry and Jedinak obviously came under the current owner, but as I remember it Hutton's contract extension was triggered by him under a clause in his deal and there was nothing the current regime could do about that.

Obviously thee are concerns over the contacts of Gabby, and Richards, but I don't believe players signed from Brentford's and Barnsley are likely to be on £50k a week.

I thought he was our best player today, Norwich just couldn't handle him.

12 hours ago, villa4europe said:

1) arsenal would probably disagree

2) even randy was trying to increase non matchday revenue, we some facilities in the trinity that can be used every day of the week, theres some daft stat along the lines of us having >20 function rooms whereas goodison park has one, they've built that education / activity bit in the corner, randy should have gone and got the football league museum to put somewhere

based on what the dr has said before i think he's looking than just match day revenue, how does he get people spending money at VP tomorrow? the number of seats will just be part of the redevelopment, it'll be bigger than an attendance boost

and on the previous page someone said about a tram to star city, with genting pulling out i dont see star city surviving, it might suffer a long drawn out decline (which lets be honest it has been for years anyway) and i still his theme park will be something quite similar to what they've got there

Arsenal are in a very different position to us, how far away from being in that position we are depends on what is planned (for clarity I mean in relation to the team, which is paramount to bringing in new fans) in the eventuality that we do get promoted.

Arsenal averaged an attendance of 59,944 (against a capacity of 60,000)  for the 2015/2016 season, whereas we averaged 33,690 (against a capacity of 42,785)

The cheapest season ticket (adult) for Arsenal in 2015/2016 was £1035 (highest was £2000), whereas our cheapest Adult Season Ticket price for the same season was £335 (highest was £615), so even given a massive increase in ground capacity we are unlikely to have the same revenues simply because the fanbase would be unlikely accept such massive increases no matter what additional services were added or what the team were doing.

I am not and never have said that the re-development of Villa park is linked to additional seats, but of course they are a major part of that.

as things stand Witton is never going to appeal to people on wet Monday morning in January....I am not sure that i can see that changing. As you have said Star City is not far away, offers many different facilities in a small area and is in decline...have you ever visited in day time and weekdays ? Believe me it's like a ghost town

We have ample conference facilities / function rooms in the Trinity...so how often are they sold out for non-match related revenue ?

Organic growth rather than development for the sake of it is what I am advocating. I don't believe this is a case of if we built it they will come, all the evidence (Star City, and even Resort World) points to the opposite.

9 hours ago, Stevo985 said:

I'm rambling. The point is, the redevelopment of VP isn't JUST about extra seats. There are parts of the ground and surrounding area that need to be redeveloped.
If the club are demolishing the North Stand to make improvements to the aesthetics, the corporate facilities, the disabled areas, the concourses etc (all stuff that needs doing), would it not make sense to add a few thousand seats while they're all at it?
Rather than doing it all at exactly the same capacity and then in 5 years be saying "oh we need more seats, we probably should have added them when we were doing all that work?"

I understand your point, and I personally would love to see a new North Stand with the features you talk of, but I would also ask this : 

if we are promoted next season and then give the green light to the works is the lost revenue while the works take place really going to matter ? Matchday takings mean so little in the Premier League these days that I doubt it will matter in the longer term. 

If we give the go ahead to improvements this summer and don't get promoted next season how likely are the new corporate facilities in the new North Stand to sell out game after game for teams like Wigan, and Rotherham (or their equivalents). If they aren't sold out and the club has to survive some more seasons in the championship on the much reduced TV money how exactly will this be done ? 

The club reduced costs this season by closing the upper tier of the trinity road stand, this was in my opinion a sensible move and meant that area didn't need staff. If we then build a new (I assume larger) North Stand, there is nothing to suggest we could fill it in this division and therefore some areas are likely to remain closed in the new stand as well as the trinity road.

personally I want Villa to be self sufficient, we all know that if we are in the Premier League and we have some success we will need to address the North Stand and surrounding areas, but surely this is better done at a time when the benefit will be noticeable and beneficial rather than having the possibility of it becoming a half full white elephant.

i am all for redevelopment, I just don't see the rush, and waiting and seeing could in this case be the best course of action, as so much hinges on next season.

1 hour ago, JE- said:

 

The Richards saga and gabby saga alone should be enough to want to see the back of him 

Which sagas ? Neither is near the first team, or have been for a while. Bruce has encouraged them, what manager wouldn't ?

the saga as I see it is they are players at his disposal and he will use them if he has to. Nothing more than that.

3 hours ago, sne said:

You know perfectly well what I mean.

Yeah sorry, was being a grouch.

4 hours ago, Stratvillan said:

I don't know about the financial situation, none of us do, so wether we are totally messed up is conjecture -spending 20m (?) on a new  North stand is only selling RmC, and our loan players. ( Vertout, Sanchez, Gil -judging by the reviews of all 3 on VT since they've left they are well worth it.

Of course the north stand is dated, of course parts of the stadium need bringing up to date. There is probably her a perfect time to do so, but at a time when we are on current form the worst team in the division and sitting just 6 points above the relegation zone, this is for sure not the right time.

Anyway it would be nice to think we could replace the ancient North Stand with the Button, two pieces of string and a carrot we'd get for the players you mention :-)

2 hours ago, OutByEaster? said:

It's not simply my pipe dream, it's an interpretation (a guess) at what the CEO has told us both in the fans meeting and on the radio, and on what Dr Xia has said a couple of times since he bought the club - he's very interested in the area, he's very interested in making Villa part of something larger. If you look at what Man City have done with a great big chunk of the edge of central manchester, I think that might be the sort of development Dr Xia is considering - albeit with more a mixed use focus.

In terms of Villa funding a development and the financial burden, this is what Dr Xia does for a living, and at this point it looks like he's able to turn a profit from it.

There are tangible benefits to the club too - If you get to a point where UK athletics for example has its offices on your property, then FFP doesn't affect your ability to build those offices, but the rent can go straight into the club coffers and be spent on player wages. RECON can build apartments; Villa can collect rents.

I'm a hundred miles ahead of myself and I'm guessing based on what land I think the club might own, a few sentences I'm drawing conclusions from and a fair bit of wishful thinking, but I think that corridor is absolutely ripe for development - you've got an athletics stadium, the dog track, the BMX facility, the gymnastics and martial arts centre and the (ahem) Doug Ellis sports centre already in place in that strip - with an iconic football stadium at the other end.

A bloke who's made a fortune redeveloping cities and owns a sporting institution that he has ambitions for in a city that's chasing a sporting event and doesn't want to pay for everything themselves might well be thinking along those lines.

I absolutely get this, I understand how it could be of benefit to the city, community and to the club, and I see how it fits with Dr Tony's specific area of expertise. If also it provides a route for works at Villa Park without causing a Fair Play problem then again inset the benefit of that.

What I don't get is people thinking we should expand the ground when we aren't filling it, and don't have  a recent history of filling it. Particular at a time when frankly nobody knows that we are going to be promoted in the next two seasons, and we all know failure to do so will likely have a very detrimental effect on the club.

Anyway it seems (from a post elsewhere on the forum... that I can't find) that Keith Wyness has ruled out stadium expansion until we are promoted, which makes a lot of sense to me.

13 hours ago, sne said:

Really is a ridiculous and unnecessary statement to say he will remain even if we are relegated.

The amount of frankly deserved hatred Bruce would face if he got us relegated would make it impossible for him to work here anymore.

I can only assume that Bruce was someone Wyness pushed for to Xia to an degree that he made it a prestige appointment and if he was sacked so might Wyness be.

The smart thing would have been to say the generic response that they have full confidence in Bruce and that he will turn it around but that he will be assessed in the summer as football is after all a result based business.

 

Deserved hatred ? Oh yes, Bruce is right up there with Hitler...I think we need a little perspective.

6 hours ago, OutByEaster? said:

I'm not sure that the whole "Sports Quarter" development and plan at this point includes the stadium itself - it possibly includes the surrounds of Villa Park, but I almost get the feeling we're talking about the corridor of land between Villa Park and the Alexander Stadium. Dr Xia is more used to developing areas than individual sites. 

The land that stretches from the soon to be demolished university to opposite Witton station; filled with housing, sport themed commercial units and offices for sporting bodies, along with some actual sporting facilities, would enable Birmingham's commonwealth games bid to be focused on a sporting corridor between the two stadia, with space for the athletes and with a legacy of sports business's and housing left behind.

It's less than two miles between the two and most of the land is empty - that would be an interesting proposition, and one that would suit Dr Xia down to the  ground.

 

That's very different, the title of the thread is referring to the redevelopment of Villa Park, which I assume would be at the cost of Villa/Recon.

What you are talking about is Villa Park being the centre piece of a grander plan (hand in hand with the city) with the entire aim of regenerating the local area.....since that would most likely involve investment from outside I can see the logic in that. Although the key for me is what happpens afterwards.

if for example Witton were to get a new station, and areas were to be set aside (perhaps in conjunction with Aston University) for science and tech as well as sport, then that would have the potential to bring more investment in the area and be of great benefit.

i am not against any development, I am against Villa having to fund such development with little gain, and considerable financial burden.

10 hours ago, Stratvillan said:

I agree, attendances will dip next year one way or another. It's the perfect time to rebuild the North Stand (where I sit), and squeeze(lol) the fans in the other 3 stands. We've proven that spending money won't get us up, we might as well redevelop the ground with the money, and create a climate of a club on the up.

Develop the ground with what money ? As I understand it if we don't get promoted next season we are totally messed up. Does fair play allow us to spend money on the ground without it affecting the ratio of income to expenditure ? I doubt it.

Last summer would have been a good time to have done this work, but for obvious reasons it was all too soon.

Knowing what we know now about this division and how hard it's been for us, should we really invest in something that's already head and shoulders above most grounds in the league ?

9 hours ago, limpid said:

You've created a straw man there. No-one has suggested there is a "Master Plan". I suspect there are a broad range of plans/agendas with different priorities depending on other factors, some inside the club's control and some outside of it. To operate a business any other way would be negligent.

Stadium and facilities plans need to be worked on so that they are ready when needed. This is high on the agenda for the groups who are working on it. The club will be working with the council on short, medium and long term plans about transport and about planning consent. They won't be waiting until we're promoted to have those conversations - it would be negligent of both the club and the council to do otherwise.

Interesting you quoted only half of my post and not the half that expained why I didn't think NOW was the right time to invest in the ground.

the master plan I referred to was Dr Tony's plan to turn Villa into a huge force again.

I understand that we need to have PLANS, and I said that in my post, but to action them now would be dangerous and have the potential to become a huge white elephant should we not get back into the premier league.

I would suggest that for any club that has such a huge influence over the local community planning for change should be a constant thing....this probably got neglected in the recent past, but that doesn't mean that right now in our current state there is any reason to push the button on work that may or may not turn out to be necessary.

i understand about running a successful business, I have been doing so for over 10 years and over stretching yourself while banking on success that hasn't yet come to fruition is just as dangerous as not having a plan in place should success be achieved, timing is crucial in everything.

Anybody advocating a business in our current position should extend capacity and build new stands (and I am not saying you directly did this) is seriously barking up the wrong tree. We were not selling out the ground in the premier league for the previous seasons, so I don't really see the problem with reducing capacity for what would be one season while work is completed, this would be the safe way to progress, have plans in place now, action them when we know where we will be.

2 hours ago, limpid said:

I suspect it's right at the top of the facilities development agenda.

I agree that in the 'Master Plan' developing Villa Park would be high on the agenda, but given nothing up until now has gone according to that plan, they'd be crazy to do much with it while we are locked in this division (or worse still lower), as any investment would have little effect on the value of the club (assuming this has some importance to the owner).

Lets say the worst happens and this season we are relegated (god forbid), spending money on a stadium that already surpasses everything but perhaps 15 grounds in the country (this is pure guesswork on my part, and not something I am stating as fact) would have no benefit to our League 1 campaign, or even to a Championship campaign, the only value in having a nice stadium is to fill it on big match days so the TV gets a good spectacle and international supporters get a good opinion on what Aston Villa is.

In the modern game gate receipts matter very little (with the exception of the few really big games), Villa have good corporate facilities on the whole, and yet these were rarely totally sold out even in the Premier League, in the worst case scenario where the plan goes totally wrong having a nice ground isn't going to make Villa attractive to new buyers, so for me, we need to have a plan for development, but activate it only when we have some stability and have a manager and team in place that are looking up rather than down, otherwise the lovely new ground just becomes a millstone around the neck of the club.

Land in Witton has very low value, so developing land in Witton also creates a low gain to the club value. The only way I can see that either would increase currently is if Villa were a Premier League team and we developed the "Theme Park of Dreams" idea to include the community in the club. I am all for the idea, and in an ideal world the North Stand at least would be replaced, but lets get things moving in the right direction on the pitch first, because up until now the good Dr has done everything he promised and his return is way short of what he expected I am sure of that, personally I'd rather he didn't waste more money.

Also, the plan fro Dr Tony was that Villa would be one of the top clubs in the world, and much as I love Villa Park, I would doubt very much that a stadium and matchday experience befitting such a club could be created in that environment.

Can't see this being high on the agenda.

1 hour ago, rodders0223 said:

On a scale of 1-10 how much do I hate that snide, self promoting knob Stan Collymore?

A solid 9.5.

I'm not sure why, but Collymore has spent the last few weeks getting into a lot of fights and battles on Twitter. Seems he has a lot of pent up aggression aimed towards the boards of Villa and Forest, and I genuinely don't know where that level of hate has come from....sour grapes perhaps (he apparently met with both boards about 'helping').

Anyway Stan was qualified to play football, but as far as I can see has done nothing in the game since, so I assume this is all about increasing listening figures for his Collymore App. Which is quite sad really as I thought he spoke a lot of sense under our old regime.

19 minutes ago, Michael118 said:

1 post?

Go and read the General Predictions thread and the 'Squad/Team - How do you see it?' thread.

No thanks

1 hour ago, jon_c said:

Depends how you look a it, both those managers were also sacked from previous jobs for being s**t. 

Hard to find any experienced manager that hasn't been sacked.

I guess Bruce will have a few more games to turn it around, but if we lose to Barnsley on Tuesday the next home game against Derby could be his last.

The problem is where do we go from here ? On paper we have one of the best squads ever assembled in this league, 2 managers have been backed by the owner to get their players in, yet there is no change.

This season, we've had one manager who won the Champions League, and one who got promoted 4 times from this division, and yet nothing changes. 

So assuming Bruce isn't here at the end of the season, who could we bring in to work with these players and make a difference ?

on another thought, is Chris Kirkland still available on a free transfer ? 

How do you solve a problem like Aston Villa ?

Hopefully now RHM will be ahead of him.

19 minutes ago, Dave J said:

No I realise this and I wasn't implying anything either - in fact I think we were both agreeing that the word hatred is not for here.

thanks fella :-))

Agreeing ? I hate that !

19 hours ago, avfc1982 said:

And if we're gonna compare Agbonlahor and Benteke, how many of the latters goals were consolation goals? Benteke was a good player but Gabby contributed more. He scored big goals in big games, winners. Benteke not nearly as many. That's why when in years to come when they're compared Gabby will always come out on top. 

Is this serious ?

in years to come we won't be wistfully remembering the days Gabby scored in big games, most likely we'll be remembering all the 1 on 1's he missed.

Being honest it's been so long that I'm already starting to struggle to remember his last meaningful contribution. 

Will never be revered in the same was as other payers from the same period, and certainly not the player whose goals single handedly saved us from relegation.

he has always been pace, pace and pace, as a footballer he is technically limited, and his pace is not what it was.

3 minutes ago, 7392craig said:

Considering Danny Graham and Steven Fletcher are strikers in this league, I imagine there are still a few teams that rather wouldn't play against Gabby.

There's always someone worse, but I don't really care about other teams crap players, I just wish we didn't have crap players.