TrentVilla Posted January 6, 2021 Moderator Share Posted January 6, 2021 4 minutes ago, The Fun Factory said: I don't think Citeh have massively increased the ticket prices and then expanded or don't they count as they are not run as a proper business? I genuinely don’t know if they’ve increased prices or not but as you say I’m not sure they are the best example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sne Posted January 6, 2021 Share Posted January 6, 2021 Certain we won't do it as long as Villa Park remains the same but wonder how many other clubs will be looking at naming rights for their stadiums now to save their economy. Quite a lot of money in it and in US sports it's more of a rule than an exception. The Milwaukee Bucks get $6m a year from Fiserv. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post blandy Posted January 6, 2021 Moderator Popular Post Share Posted January 6, 2021 29 minutes ago, TrentVilla said: It simply doesn’t mate commercial sense to commit capital expenditure to ground expansion and charge low ticket prices. Fans won’t want to hear it but ticket prices will go up before ground expansions are even considered, it’s simple supply and demand economics. I mean, that's right, or at least it's right in the orthodox sense that this is not what the super-capitalist clubs do, but it needn't necessarily be completely the case, depending on how long term you look. Clubs are all about leveraging sponsorships and commercial deals to raise the big money. It's those deals that wallop up the income, along with Champions league TV revenue and revenue from finishing at the top end of the Prem. The other big one is the corporate sector attending games, and the fortune that those boxes and packages cost for a big game. If a club were to see demand or a market for more corporate places, then a new stand could be built with a mix of new boxes and "normal" seating. I mean going on what CP said on the radio, at "losing a million quid a game" for Villa - that's £25 per person in the ground. and other clubs losing 4-5 million per game - say with 60,000 people (not) there - that's around £70 per person - and obviously a chunk of that is from higher prices for tickets for fans, but a lot of that is from the loss of the corporate income. Liverpool, Spurs, Arsenal, Man Utd and so on have way more corporate income and facilities than do Villa, as I understand it. And they've all spent huge sums on ground building to incorporate those corporate facilities (as well as extra seats for fans. Like you, I can't see Villa embiggening the capacity while keeping ticket prices around where they are, I think what I'm saying is that any ground expansion (and I don't suppose it'll happen any time soon) would definitely look at expanding both corporate and normal seating capacity. The challenge with Villa is that the two stands that most need an overhaul are the North Stand, which being behind the goal and the smallest stand is not optimal for corporates, and the Witton lane, where there's difficulty because of the road and housing. If there was the amount of room there is behind the North Stand available behind the Witton lane stand, then I think they'd already be on the case of rebuilding it, because the finances could work. But there isn't. The final thing, I guess is the point that's been made about "image" - and the number of people in the ground does affect that. It's one of the factors that gives clubs that "Elite level Club" image which then attracts sponsors and so on. At the point of lockdown Villa had basically sold out every home game since Dean Smith became manager, with a waiting list for season tickets. That's a happy place for the club to be in and suggests that (if/when) things open up again the demand for more seating capacity is real. Sure they could manage that down/exploit it by increasing prices, but they need to be careful and this whole corollafungus thing has caused supporters a lot of grief financially - things are tight for people generally. Stadium development cost doesn't count against FFP expenditure, but revenue gained from it counts positively towards the calcs, so a gain in income from more corporate plus more bums on seats is beneficial. If the club could turn that £25 per person average into £35 per person, and from an extra 10,000 people in the ground the matchday revenue is 80% higher and around 15 million a season higher - going from 19 million a season to almost 35 million a season. Still only a minor part of overall revenue, but not to be sniffed at. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul514 Posted January 6, 2021 Share Posted January 6, 2021 1 hour ago, TrentVilla said: It simply doesn’t mate commercial sense to commit capital expenditure to ground expansion and charge low ticket prices. Fans won’t want to hear it but ticket prices will go up before ground expansions are even considered, it’s simple supply and demand economics. To be honest everything the owners have done hasn't made commercial sense, they have spent way more than we are (currently) worth, but we love them for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sne Posted January 6, 2021 Share Posted January 6, 2021 (edited) Apparently Jack Grealish has been handed a attribute upgrade on FIFA 21 and honestly this is as big of a thing as the club could hope for when it comes to exposure towards people (possible Kenneth gif) and raise club profile around the world under 25-30 at least. The best players of FIFA are known even by those who don't watch football. Aston Villa is not. Edited January 6, 2021 by sne 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted January 7, 2021 Moderator Share Posted January 7, 2021 14 hours ago, blandy said: Clubs are all about leveraging sponsorships and commercial deals to raise the big money. It's those deals that wallop up the income, along with Champions league TV revenue and revenue from finishing at the top end of the Prem. The other big one is the corporate sector attending games, and the fortune that those boxes and packages cost for a big game. If a club were to see demand or a market for more corporate places, then a new stand could be built with a mix of new boxes and "normal" seating. I mean going on what CP said on the radio, at "losing a million quid a game" for Villa - that's £25 per person in the ground. and other clubs losing 4-5 million per game - say with 60,000 people (not) there - that's around £70 per person - and obviously a chunk of that is from higher prices for tickets for fans, but a lot of that is from the loss of the corporate income. Liverpool, Spurs, Arsenal, Man Utd and so on have way more corporate income and facilities than do Villa, as I understand it. And they've all spent huge sums on ground building to incorporate those corporate facilities (as well as extra seats for fans. Like you, I can't see Villa embiggening the capacity while keeping ticket prices around where they are, I think what I'm saying is that any ground expansion (and I don't suppose it'll happen any time soon) would definitely look at expanding both corporate and normal seating capacity. The challenge with Villa is that the two stands that most need an overhaul are the North Stand, which being behind the goal and the smallest stand is not optimal for corporates, and the Witton lane, where there's difficulty because of the road and housing. If there was the amount of room there is behind the North Stand available behind the Witton lane stand, then I think they'd already be on the case of rebuilding it, because the finances could work. But there isn't. The final thing, I guess is the point that's been made about "image" - and the number of people in the ground does affect that. It's one of the factors that gives clubs that "Elite level Club" image which then attracts sponsors and so on. At the point of lockdown Villa had basically sold out every home game since Dean Smith became manager, with a waiting list for season tickets. That's a happy place for the club to be in and suggests that (if/when) things open up again the demand for more seating capacity is real. Sure they could manage that down/exploit it by increasing prices, but they need to be careful and this whole corollafungus thing has caused supporters a lot of grief financially - things are tight for people generally. Stadium development cost doesn't count against FFP expenditure, but revenue gained from it counts positively towards the calcs, so a gain in income from more corporate plus more bums on seats is beneficial. If the club could turn that £25 per person average into £35 per person, and from an extra 10,000 people in the ground the matchday revenue is 80% higher and around 15 million a season higher - going from 19 million a season to almost 35 million a season. Still only a minor part of overall revenue, but not to be sniffed at. On your first point above I agree, clubs are all about sponsorship and commercial deals these days, matchday revenue simply isn't as important as it once was. I think that makes ground expansion less likely if anything because the amount of capital expenditure required can be better spent and potentially return more value through better team performance. Corporate or other commercial non match day opportunities obviously add another dimension but I just don't think we've a lot of untapped potential on that front currently. On the point re image and elite level club, I don't agree. Look at Chelsea and their capacity, look at Man City and their often mocked attendance. I also don't think the number of people in the ground has a direct impact on sponsorship revenue, we aren't in the Andy Cash records world any more. We live in a time when United drive new signings into their training ground in cars that aren't even available in the UK market in order to help boost sales for their sponsor in overseas markets. These days sponsorship is about TV exposure to international and domestic audiences but largely in that order. I agree the club was in a very healthy position in terms of attendance/waiting lists, probably the best position since 2010 and if not for COVID on the back of this season I think we would have seen some fairly big price increase. Not so sure they will do that now but when its safe to return to stadiums properly the demand for tickets will be on a level never seen before so who knows. On your last point, I totally agree and that will certainly be the target long before any expansion consideration in my view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted January 7, 2021 Share Posted January 7, 2021 (edited) 22 hours ago, The Fun Factory said: I don't think Citeh have massively increased the ticket prices and then expanded or don't they count as they are not run as a proper business? City increased the number of bands for ticket prices, means they were able to do some sections of comparatively cheap season tickets, the cheapest tickets have stayed cheap but the expensive tickets have increased They have tickets that are cheaper than ours but then they also have a lot of sections that will be more expensive Its then whether or not the media reports average price or lowest price (with a lot reporting lowest) West ham do the same, we did with L1 and L8 in the lower holte a few years back I think Edited January 7, 2021 by villa4europe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted January 7, 2021 Share Posted January 7, 2021 On 04/01/2021 at 16:37, Zatman said: 1 million is a lit but could imagine teams like Spurs/Arsenal losing a lot more Spurs are in massive trouble due to the debt of their new stadium. If they do not get CL they are in massive trouble. The amount of revenue they have lost is frightening Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted January 7, 2021 Moderator Share Posted January 7, 2021 8 hours ago, TrentVilla said: On your last point, I totally agree and that will certainly be the target long before any expansion consideration in my view. To continue the conversation, I mentioned that getting another 10,000 people in would be part of that (example) calculation. I mean Wolves recently increased their capacity to accomodate demand, and have plans to do so again. Personally I do think their "image" is increased in value as a consequence. Their prices now are similar to ours - so it doesn't have to lead to big price rises. There might be exceptions to this, but I get the impression that clubs with genuine ambitions to compete at the top end feel they need to have grounds that hold more than used to be the case. That 50,000 is the new 40,000. Chelsea have been looking for ages to move or expand, they've just had massive issues getting planning permission. Man City used to play in front of 35000, now it's 55000. Add to that Liverpool, Utd, Arsenal, Spurs, Newcastle, Everton, West Ham, Derby, Boro and so on - all these clubs have moved or are moving to bigger grounds, or expanded. Our capacity is down on what it used to be. I think (with the possible, arguable, exception of West Ham) that the commercial rights or marketing image of those clubs went up with the moves. There's also the issue of attracting replacement fans - if you have a capacity that's dwarfed by demand, and so have high prices for all the seats, then new, young fans can't afford to become lifelong fans to replace older people who stop attending. You need to be constantly renewing the fanbase, and where there's greater demand than supply, the ability to catch these new fans is crucial. Of course there's don't run before you can walk and a couple of season's worth of sell out gates might not be enough evidence to change priorities for investing in a club - it looks like our owners want to be certain (or at least as certain as anyone can be) that the team is capable of challenging and staying middle to upper reaches before putting a lot of finance into ground expansion, and I'm not saying that if they do, prices won't rise. They're bound to. I kind of feel that like with a former chairman, there's the possibility of failing to act, failing to read the way the game/business has moved on and then realising when it's too late, when the boat has sailed, that you've missed the opportunity and it'll take 20 years to just get back to where you thought you were. Who knows what the world will be like post corollafungus . It won't be the same, though. SO maybe caution might turn out to be right. I wouldn't bet on it though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa89 Posted January 7, 2021 Share Posted January 7, 2021 47 minutes ago, blandy said: I kind of feel that like with a former chairman, there's the possibility of failing to act, failing to read the way the game/business has moved on and then realising when it's too late, when the boat has sailed, that you've missed the opportunity and it'll take 20 years to just get back to where you thought you were. I think the first priority is to establish the club as a top 10 premier league team. Once that is done, probably at the end of next season, then you can look at the situation and decide what ground expansion is needed/is feasible. For us a ground expansion would basically mean knocking the north stand and replacing it. Something like that could be built in ~9 months. The important thing is that the club has planning permission, construction partners, etc. all lined up so that when the expansion is needed it can happen relatively quickly. We don't want to be in a situation where we need a bigger ground but the planning permission is stuck 'in process' by civil servants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted January 7, 2021 Moderator Share Posted January 7, 2021 1 minute ago, villa89 said: I think the first priority is to establish the club as a top 10 premier league team. Once that is done, probably at the end of next season, then you can look at the situation and decide what ground expansion is needed/is feasible. SUre. I would say that if the aim is to establish us as top 10 or better (I agree), and then start thinking about what expansion is feasible, there's absolutely nothing to stop them looking at what is feasible if that were to happen now - so that once it does happen, they're immediately ready to go. I mean that's just planning ahead, but not acting until the trigger point is reached. It's better to plan ahead than reach the place where you wanted to be and then go "and now what do we do?" I'm absolutely certain that Purslow and the owners have probably several "what if" courses of action already thought through and planned - everything from relegation to qualifying for Europe. Additionally I would think that with what's been going on both with Villa and in the wider world, that ground expansion will have been nowhere near the front of the queue of things to be acted upon - We had promotion via the play offs - so 2 plans there, then the next season relegation/survival - another 2 plans. Then there's been the training ground and the HS2 land thing. Commercial deals, kit, website, the fungus pandemic and no fans in the ground... He'll have been very busy indeed and will continue to be so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ender4 Posted January 7, 2021 Share Posted January 7, 2021 Quote I knew we would be competing with other top clubs, but Gemma and I were able to deliver a Microsoft Teams presentation to Mana about our long-term ambitions, our playing and training environment, and how she would fit into our team. Fortunately that was a great conversation, and then it was about trying to construct a deal. This time I presented to Christian Purslow, our CEO, about the benefits of signing Mana, both on and off the pitch; not only will she improve our side, she will also boost our profile in women’s football, and in Japan. Constructing a unique deal with our CEO is something I’m really proud of. Taken from the womens thread... i found it interesting about her (the Sporting Director) presentation to Purslow about the 'off the pitch' benefits and that it was partly about boosting our profile in Japan. Purslow then signs off on it after hearing the presentation. I wonder if its similar with Lange for the men's team. https://www.theguardian.com/football/2020/dec/31/aston-villa-my-crazy-challenging-first-year-has-ended-on-a-high 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaVilla Posted January 7, 2021 Share Posted January 7, 2021 6 hours ago, ender4 said: Taken from the womens thread... i found it interesting about her (the Sporting Director) presentation to Purslow about the 'off the pitch' benefits and that it was partly about boosting our profile in Japan. Purslow then signs off on it after hearing the presentation. I wonder if its similar with Lange for the men's team. https://www.theguardian.com/football/2020/dec/31/aston-villa-my-crazy-challenging-first-year-has-ended-on-a-high exactly why i think we should get Shinji kagawa on a free.......yes its a contract for a 31 year old, but he's probably still a decent player (at least usable squad wise), but mainly he's HUGE in Japan and would bring a whole new set of fans and profile to the club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted January 9, 2021 Share Posted January 9, 2021 On 07/01/2021 at 20:10, MaVilla said: exactly why i think we should get Shinji kagawa on a free.......yes its a contract for a 31 year old, but he's probably still a decent player (at least usable squad wise), but mainly he's HUGE in Japan and would bring a whole new set of fans and profile to the club. He was playing in the Spanish 2nd division last season and couldnt get a new contract there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted January 9, 2021 Share Posted January 9, 2021 I think Purslow deserves some credit for last night as well, since he came in I think he restructured the academy and has been very vocal about giving young players a chance. He has named a few players as well he believes has potential. Barry, Bogarde etc were signed from top level academies as well 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaVilla Posted February 4, 2021 Share Posted February 4, 2021 (edited) Purslow Interview (4th Feb) INTERVIEW | Christian Purslow delivers club update https://video.avfc.co.uk/video/dm9kJTdDMF90bzRmMnhhYSU3QyUyRnNlY3Rpb24lM0ZzbHVnJTNEaG9tZSU3Q2hvbWUlMkZoZXJvX2Nhcm91c2Vs?lang=en Notes: - States they werent definitely going to do business in Jan, but if something came up that was worthwhile & a good deal, they would. - States they enquired about Sanson in the summer but the quoted fee was too high, with the depression in the market it allowed them to move swiftly to secure him in Jan rather than wait until next summer, mentioned they would have gone for him in the summer if he wasnt signed in Jan. - Mentions is was good to get Sanson in Jan as it gives him the rest of this season to settle and adapt. - Discusses that they have a long term strategy with regard to improving the team and transfers (specifically mentions a 5 year plan). - Discusses this seasons progress compared to last year. - Discusses the Academy. Edited February 4, 2021 by MaVilla 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Talldarkandransome Posted February 5, 2021 Share Posted February 5, 2021 16 hours ago, MaVilla said: Purslow Interview (4th Feb) INTERVIEW | Christian Purslow delivers club update https://video.avfc.co.uk/video/dm9kJTdDMF90bzRmMnhhYSU3QyUyRnNlY3Rpb24lM0ZzbHVnJTNEaG9tZSU3Q2hvbWUlMkZoZXJvX2Nhcm91c2Vs?lang=en Notes: - States they werent definitely going to do business in Jan, but if something came up that was worthwhile & a good deal, they would. - States they enquired about Sanson in the summer but the quoted fee was too high, with the depression in the market it allowed them to move swiftly to secure him in Jan rather than wait until next summer, mentioned they would have gone for him in the summer if he wasnt signed in Jan. - Mentions is was good to get Sanson in Jan as it gives him the rest of this season to settle and adapt. - Discusses that they have a long term strategy with regard to improving the team and transfers (specifically mentions a 5 year plan). - Discusses this seasons progress compared to last year. - Discusses the Academy. Great interview, gives me confidence that we have people like this running the show Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted February 5, 2021 Share Posted February 5, 2021 I was most interested in his transfer market comments, he said that clubs are feeling the pinch from covid financially and thats why less deals were done but our owners told him and Johan that if the right player comes along they would finance it 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest av1 Posted February 5, 2021 Share Posted February 5, 2021 I don't want to dig up old ground, but the difference with this bloke to the likes of Wyness (sp?) Is absolutely night and day. I'm confident in every single position at the club atm, from owners down to the Manager. I'm not sure when I could last day that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vive_La_Villa Posted February 5, 2021 Share Posted February 5, 2021 (edited) 8 minutes ago, av1 said: I don't want to dig up old ground, but the difference with this bloke to the likes of Wyness (sp?) Is absolutely night and day. I'm confident in every single position at the club atm, from owners down to the Manager. I'm not sure when I could last day that. But Wyness said had he got the chance to work with the current owners they would have done special things together. Oh well what a shame we won’t get a chance to see that. Edited February 5, 2021 by Vive_La_Villa 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts