Jump to content

Villa Park redevelopment


Phumfeinz

Recommended Posts

Just now, sidcow said:

I'd certainly like it to be asked about the new directors with their particular skills and experience, why they specifically have been brought in.

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, thabucks said:

As much as they aren’t leaving Villa park yes … Phase two of the original proposals saw capacity increase to 53’000. Heck has said we’re looking at reconfiguring the bowl to increase capacity… 

“We’re looking at” is not remotely the same as categorically stating we’re not leaving villa park

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Mazrim said:

To be honest, you're not really saying anything much. You're just quoting minutes from a meeting we've all read, and claiming it’s a club statement, which it isn't. And you seem to be upset by anybody considering even the slight possibility that we move stadium. You don't think we'll move and you think the club have stated this. We get it. 

I didn’t say it was a “club statement” in the way that you’re implying. I’m saying it was A statement (as in a grammatical statement) officially released by the club. Which it is. 
 

I have no problem whatsoever with people considering a move. I’ve never said I have. I think it’s bit weird, but I don’t have a problem with it. 
 

This whole discussion started with YOU asking ME “who said we are not moving?”

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, OutByEaster? said:

I've personally been present on occasions when Wes Edens, Christian Purslow and Chris Heck have each stated they don't have any plans to move from Villa Park and that they see it as our home. I'm sure it's been mentioned by key people at the clubs in interviews too. It's why I think a redevelopment of the site we're on (and its surrounds) is much more likely than a move.

 

 

10fd4a09-559a-4e84-a649-a8fb12dbb96a_tex

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I were the owner of Villa Park, before I did any redevelopment I would make sure it made financial sense first. Assuming it did and assuming the North Stand is first, I would look at a design that could be integrated with future rebuilds of the adjacent stands to increase capacity and hopefully profitability.

Did anybody take a look at how easily the last proposed North Stand could be integrated with future redevelopment of the adjacent stands?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Captain_Townsend said:

If we are doing the 3000 reconfigure thing, would we not need planning permission?

It depends on what exactly is happening, if it’s classed as ‘development’. Moving seats around to significantly increase the capacity could be development, but using currently used parts slightly differently and with a different layout might not be. If any new built works are taking place then yeah that would be development too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

There's an informal meeting scheduled for next week with the FAB - shall we ask?

 

Yes please. Also some more info about the Atairos investment and what ‘infrastructure’ is being referred to (ie physical or business). And the badge fiasco. Thanks.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

“We’re looking at” is not remotely the same as categorically stating we’re not leaving villa park

I meant the club have said we aren’t moving and also said we are going to add 3000 extra seats - it’s in the phase two plans. Yet some fans don’t believe it is something we are looking to do. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact is someone at the club carefully worded a section of some minutes, to state moving from villa park is not part of any plans.

The fact is we have a formal club announcement on our website (Still available) saying we are building a new North Stand.

It is entirely possible that neither of these things are now true, especially so as we already know one of them isn't.

This doesn't mean we are or are not moving and this doesn't mean we are or aren't now doing a major redevelopment.

Noone knows, and pointing to anything the club have said in the past to guide what is happening now is pointless. Especially so when pointing to some minutes that were so very specifically worded so as to remain true as of the time stated whatever happens in the future.

Edited by MrBlack
Adding link
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, thabucks said:

I meant the club have said we aren’t moving and also said we are going to add 3000 extra seats - it’s in the phase two plans. Yet some fans don’t believe it is something we are looking to do. 

"To increase capacity, we can change the seating layout in some areas to add approximately two to three thousand seats". is the quote from Mr Heck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, useless said:

if anything is planned man they're probably going to announce it as part of the 150th Anniversary celebrations

I think if they're planning a serious redevelopment we'll be a few more years before it appears in public, they could perhaps re-start the North Stand plans to coincide with the 150th anniversary, but I think we're likely just to see an announcement of the existing refurbishment plan which is just beginning to get underway.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

I didn’t say it was a “club statement” in the way that you’re implying. I’m saying it was A statement (as in a grammatical statement) officially released by the club. Which it is. 
 

I have no problem whatsoever with people considering a move. I’ve never said I have. I think it’s bit weird, but I don’t have a problem with it. 
 

This whole discussion started with YOU asking ME “who said we are not moving?”

 

I thought you had some new info. Lets draw a line under it now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, thabucks said:

I meant the club have said we aren’t moving and also said we are going to add 3000 extra seats - it’s in the phase two plans. Yet some fans don’t believe it is something we are looking to do. 

The club have said “we are not moving” and the club have said “we are looking at the possibility of adding 3000 seats
 

If you can’t see the difference between those two things then I can’t help you

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

The club have said “we are not moving” and the club have said “we are looking at the possibility of adding 3000 seats
 

If you can’t see the difference between those two things then I can’t help you

I think we are thinking about moving. Fight me over it. 😬😝

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

The club have said “we are not moving” and the club have said “we are looking at the possibility of adding 3000 seats
 

If you can’t see the difference between those two things then I can’t help you

What is your problem ? It’s in the phase two plans we are going to add 3000 seats and if  you read what I’ve posted I was agreeing with you earlier FFS. They have said we aren’t moving and we will add 3000 extra seats but some don’t / won’t believe either statement. But i guess from your posts that you are a linguistic and semantics expert into the exact meaning of words as well and how they are meant and to be interpreted. Thank you for the enlightenment 

Edited by thabucks
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â