bannedfromHandV Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 22 hours ago, OutByEaster? said: Safer, but much less significant - get through the group stages of the Champions league once and you'll make the money that the new North Stand would over a decade. TV money is king to the point where unless you're the absolute top of the pile, stadium incomes aren't a great differentiator. I dunno, it feels that maybe the incremental growth of matchday revenues will now take a back seat to the opportunity for Champions league qualification and a doubling of our TV and sponsorship revenues. I'm sure we'll come back to the stadium - but for now, perhaps they're just concentrating on the extremely juicy lowest hanging fruit? In fairness, that approach fits in a little bit with the post-Gerrard approach - something clicked and we went from looking for slow but consistent growth and being a developing project into getting the best we can to win right now - perhaps the prioritisation of revenue streams fits into that. I dunno, I'm just fishing for something that makes sense. Maybe the owners are privy to far more information than the rest of us with regards the Super League that hasn’t gone away, maybe it’s now or never in terms of being a top European club to gain access to the new top table, maybe that’s had an impact on the perceived quickening of timetables and also the halting of the redevelopment. I dunno, just spitballing but the recent legal announcement on the super league seems to have been followed up with an unexpected and reserved reaction from those involved in driving it all, given how brash they were first time around maybe it’s actually going to happen in the not too distant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fruitvilla Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 20 hours ago, ender4 said: Spurs with no CL/european football - £100 million matchday revenue. Villa with no CL/european football - £16m matchday revenue. Something is off with these numbers .... that's about 80 quid per matchday punter for Spurs and 20 quid for a Villa fan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincenzo Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 (edited) The new stadium option doesn’t go away for me although the club have denied any truth in this rumour Just seems that looking forward from a commercial viewpoint it makes good business sense I love Villa Park and don’t want us to move but these are savvy money people and I’m guessing you’d get your ROI sooner especially with a Wembley style corporate setup Edited January 3 by Vincenzo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spiezels Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 33 minutes ago, fruitvilla said: Something is off with these numbers .... that's about 80 quid per matchday punter for Spurs and 20 quid for a Villa fan From what i hear the stands are full pre and post games with people boozing. They do a million game just on booze. The place has been designed so well to extract the maximum they can from fans. You can see how many tourists are in the stands when they’re on TV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fruitvilla Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 6 minutes ago, spiezels said: From what i hear the stands are full pre and post games with people boozing. They do a million game just on booze. The place has been designed so well to extract the maximum they can from fans.You can see how many tourists are in the stands when they’re on TV. I believe the 80 quid ... it's the twenty I don't get. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spiezels Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 Do their NFL games come into match day revenue? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain_Townsend Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 13 minutes ago, Kiwivillan said: It's been postponed on the chance of CL next season and the lost revenue of reduced seating as I understood. FAB said they were given the impression it was ditched. We played a uefa Cup campaign I'm 1994 with a half built Holte. Their reasoning made zero sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 I suspect the club has put out invitations for tender for the new stand and the quotes they are getting back mean the project no longer stacks up financially. For all we know the owners made the final call and Heck has been the guy who has to break the news. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurtsimonw Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 7 hours ago, Captain_Townsend said: We played a uefa Cup campaign I'm 1994 with a half built Holte. Their reasoning made zero sense. The UEFA Cup in '94 and Champions League in '24 aren't really comparable. If it is the reason, it makes sense, and honestly it would be negligent not to. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Icarium Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 47 minutes ago, LondonLax said: I suspect the club has put out invitations for tender for the new stand and the quotes they are getting back mean the project no longer stacks up financially. For all we know the owners made the final call and Heck has been the guy who has to break the news. And that's fine, but grow a spine and tell the fans that, instead of some bs about growing to quickly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 Revenue, you say. I've got an idea, let's take our oldest and smallest stand, and then increase it in size so we've got an extra 10,000 fans in the ground. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Mic09 Posted January 4 Popular Post Share Posted January 4 What I don't understand is the CL argument for not building the North Stand. Firstly, it is not guaranteed. We don't know if we'll be playing CL next season. Second, even if we are, isn't our aim to play CL 3-4 seasons from now too? Wouldn't it be better to have the stand sooner as in 3-4 years we will have the same dilemma? The only reason I see for not doing it now is that should the owners spunk £100m+ they might not be so inclined to spend it on players in the summer. That is a valid argument, but while it's not my money, I would rather do it now then be in exactly the same position 3-4 years down the line. 4 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HKP90 Posted January 4 VT Supporter Share Posted January 4 2 hours ago, LondonLax said: I suspect the club has put out invitations for tender for the new stand and the quotes they are getting back mean the project no longer stacks up financially. For all we know the owners made the final call and Heck has been the guy who has to break the news. Possible, but the costs don't just start with physical works. Before we'll have even heard that this was a possibility, they would have needed to engage architects, planning consultants, traffic management consultants, environmental consultants (that's me), geotechnical consultants (also me), etc etc etc. They would have already spent a butt load of money. These days when you build, especially projects like this, you can't just wing it, or change your mind half way through, you need to be all in or not at all. Otherwise you've wasted a butt ton of money. Unless you are HS2, but then you've wasted other people's money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain_Townsend Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 (edited) 11 minutes ago, Mic09 said: What I don't understand is the CL argument for not building the North Stand. Firstly, it is not guaranteed. We don't know if we'll be playing CL next season. Second, even if we are, isn't our aim to play CL 3-4 seasons from now too? Wouldn't it be better to have the stand sooner as in 3-4 years we will have the same dilemma? The only reason I see for not doing it now is that should the owners spunk £100m+ they might not be so inclined to spend it on players in the summer. That is a valid argument, but while it's not my money, I would rather do it now then be in exactly the same position 3-4 years down the line. Correct. It's a joke of a decision. And the cowardly way it was announced is a disgrace. The local media should be holding them to account for this. For 2 years it had all been about transport and station upgrades, regeneration in the area and then, after all of that, the club pulls the plug? It is embarrassing. Edited January 4 by Captain_Townsend 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPAngel Posted January 4 VT Supporter Share Posted January 4 24 minutes ago, Mic09 said: What I don't understand is the CL argument for not building the North Stand. Firstly, it is not guaranteed. We don't know if we'll be playing CL next season. Second, even if we are, isn't our aim to play CL 3-4 seasons from now too? Wouldn't it be better to have the stand sooner as in 3-4 years we will have the same dilemma? The only reason I see for not doing it now is that should the owners spunk £100m+ they might not be so inclined to spend it on players in the summer. That is a valid argument, but while it's not my money, I would rather do it now then be in exactly the same position 3-4 years down the line. Perhaps, and this is wishful thinking, they are so confident about us to getting CL football each season for the foreseeable future that they see reducing our current capacity and spending a fortune on updating the North Stand as a waste of money. Why spend vast sums of money on updating the stadium over the next few years if they're thinking it may not be a viable arena for the inevitable success coming our way? We're better off moving to an absolute coliseum in 5-10 years time. A bit of a leap, but I need a way to calm down after the commercial blunders of the last few weeks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa89 Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 15 hours ago, spiezels said: Do their NFL games come into match day revenue? I would assume so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fun Factory Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 2 hours ago, LondonLax said: I suspect the club has put out invitations for tender for the new stand and the quotes they are getting back mean the project no longer stacks up financially. For all we know the owners made the final call and Heck has been the guy who has to break the news. After the premier league has signed a 6 billion pound new tv deal. Construction prices are not magically going to go done either, so are they happy for us to have an aging medium-sized stadium with limited revenue-rasing facilities compared to all of our rivals? If that is the case say it, not that we were building it too fast and we couldn't fill another 8,000 seats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted January 4 VT Supporter Share Posted January 4 On 02/01/2024 at 15:07, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said: Question, the people who already moan about ticket prices, and are also moaning about North Stand Development, you do know it's almost a certainty that redevelopment would likely coincide with substantial price increases too, right? A rise in profile of the club through CL qualification, leading to an increase in demand for tickets and a shortage of supply because we're at capacity already; coupled with a need to maximise revenues to keep pace with other clubs at our level who can do the same by selling a far greater number of tickets... would also lead to a considerable hike in prices I would have thought 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Stevo985 Posted January 4 VT Supporter Popular Post Share Posted January 4 On 02/01/2024 at 20:26, limpid said: Completely off topic, but 2 1 10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HKP90 Posted January 4 VT Supporter Share Posted January 4 56 minutes ago, The Fun Factory said: After the premier league has signed a 6 billion pound new tv deal. Construction prices are not magically going to go done either, so are they happy for us to have an aging medium-sized stadium with limited revenue-rasing facilities compared to all of our rivals? If that is the case say it, not that we were building it too fast and we couldn't fill another 8,000 seats. Errrr. I take it you didn't work on HS2 or the 2012 Olympics? Contractors we worked with on those projects jacked up their price 4-fold, because they knew the Government could afford to pay it. And they (allegedly) colluded to avoid price undercutting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts