Hank Scorpio Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 34 minutes ago, Talldarkandransome said: Can either of them play centre back Might take Mallory Edens at CB at this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted February 14 Moderator Share Posted February 14 An interesting thing in there is: Quote The group announced in December that US investor Atairos had become a minority partner in V Sports, with people familiar with the matter saying the roughly 20 per cent stake valued Aston Villa at more than £500mn 20% is a bigger stake than I'd have thought they'd have got - it's a significant amount. The valuation is nice, but I still think there's plenty of room for growth in it. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wishywashy Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 (edited) 37 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said: An interesting thing in there is: 20% is a bigger stake than I'd have thought they'd have got - it's a significant amount. The valuation is nice, but I still think there's plenty of room for growth in it. Everton's sale have them valued at around £600m, and West Ham were valued at £750m a few years ago: although I imagine the valuation of both those clubs will have been significantly boosted on account of their very new stadiums. I think Villa Park's value has depreciated even lower than the c.£55m it was sold for at this point. Edited February 14 by wishywashy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wishywashy Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 (edited) The EU Commission approved the Atairos investment a few days ago. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/mex_24_846 Quote Commission clears acquisition of V Sports by Atairos, NNS UK and AVI The European Commission has approved, under the EU Merger Regulation, the acquisition of joint control of Luxembourg-based V Sports SCS by Cayman Islands-based A-AV LLC (“Atairos”), NNS UK Investments LTD (“NNS UK”), based in Cyprus and Aston Villa Investors LLC (“AVI”), based in the United States. Currently, V Sports is jointly controlled by NNS UK and AVI. The transaction mainly concerns sports club activities. Fascinating times ahead for Villa. There are an awful lot of interesting questions surrounding this Atairos deal: why are NSWE pursuing third party investment? Why is it with a company that is funded exclusively by Comcast? Do we have to have a new nickname for the owners now? NSWEA? ANSWE? The most curious question of them all (imo), is why the announcement was explicit that the funds were for "growth and infrastructure developments". Especially given that the one large-scale infrastructure development (that we know of...) was scrapped months ago. Edited February 19 by wishywashy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidcow Posted February 19 VT Supporter Share Posted February 19 6 hours ago, wishywashy said: The EU Commission approved the Atairos investment a few days ago. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/mex_24_846 Fascinating times ahead for Villa. There are an awful lot of interesting questions surrounding this Atairos deal: why are NSWE pursuing third party investment? Why is it with a company that is funded exclusively by Comcast? Do we have to have a new nickname for the owners now? NSWEA? ANSWE? The most curious question of them all (imo), is why the announcement was explicit that the funds were for "growth and infrastructure developments". Especially given that the one large-scale infrastructure development (that we know of...) was scrapped months ago. I'm wondering if this is to build a stadium in Las Vegas ahead of the team there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sne Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 4 minutes ago, sidcow said: I'm wondering if this is to build a stadium in Las Vegas ahead of the team there? That team wont happen I think I read. They went with some other expansion city. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nick76 Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 6 hours ago, wishywashy said: Do we have to have a new nickname for the owners now? NSWEA? ANSWE? WEANS 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 26 minutes ago, sne said: That team wont happen I think I read. They went with some other expansion city. went to san diego 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allani Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 8 hours ago, wishywashy said: The EU Commission approved the Atairos investment a few days ago. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/mex_24_846 Fascinating times ahead for Villa. There are an awful lot of interesting questions surrounding this Atairos deal: why are NSWE pursuing third party investment? Why is it with a company that is funded exclusively by Comcast? Do we have to have a new nickname for the owners now? NSWEA? ANSWE? The most curious question of them all (imo), is why the announcement was explicit that the funds were for "growth and infrastructure developments". Especially given that the one large-scale infrastructure development (that we know of...) was scrapped months ago. Comcast own the sports stadium in Philadelphia and implemented a number of projects for raising revenue around the stadium (naming rights to the scoreboard, other parts of the stadium, etc), they also own a ticketing company (which all the teams using the stadium now use) and also are heavily involved in sports media / broadcasting. So you can see why they would be of interest for us to partner with given their considerable experience of revenue generation within the sports arena. My gut feel is that Comcast will become a major vehicle for us expanding our revenues through a number of the channels in which they have expertise. Rather than us paying for all these services the Atairos deal potentially (indirectly) means that Comcast have skin in the game and so there is a bigger incentive for them to charge us less but deliver more. I remember at the time of the initial announcement there was a slightly odd comment about Atairos buying a minority ownership of VSports and that the ownership of Aston Villa remained unaffected. Which does make me wonder whether that has been done so that there is no direct ownership issue between Comcast and Villa - making it easier for Comcast or their subsiduaries to conclude deals with Villa without their being a "conflict of interest" debate? I would be quite surprised if we don't move our ticketing platform or find ourselves with some new shirt / ground sponsors in the near future. And that of course doesn't touch on how the £100m will be used on infrastructure projects. You'd imagine some of that will be spent on developing some of the shared academy facilities in Africa, etc. But could VSports pay for some of the developments around VP (e.g. shop, additional venue space) and then lease them to Villa? That would seem to de-link us from the initial expenses (whether or not they might be taken into account by FFP) but still allow us to claim any additional revenue / profits on our balance sheet. Meanwhile VSports gets rental income to balance their books and to fund other projects benefitting us and other teams within the VSports network. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fun Factory Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 2 minutes ago, allani said: Comcast own the sports stadium in Philadelphia and implemented a number of projects for raising revenue around the stadium (naming rights to the scoreboard, other parts of the stadium, etc), they also own a ticketing company (which all the teams using the stadium now use) and also are heavily involved in sports media / broadcasting. So you can see why they would be of interest for us to partner with given their considerable experience of revenue generation within the sports arena. My gut feel is that Comcast will become a major vehicle for us expanding our revenues through a number of the channels in which they have expertise. Rather than us paying for all these services the Atairos deal potentially (indirectly) means that Comcast have skin in the game and so there is a bigger incentive for them to charge us less but deliver more. I remember at the time of the initial announcement there was a slightly odd comment about Atairos buying a minority ownership of VSports and that the ownership of Aston Villa remained unaffected. Which does make me wonder whether that has been done so that there is no direct ownership issue between Comcast and Villa - making it easier for Comcast or their subsiduaries to conclude deals with Villa without their being a "conflict of interest" debate? I would be quite surprised if we don't move our ticketing platform or find ourselves with some new shirt / ground sponsors in the near future. And that of course doesn't touch on how the £100m will be used on infrastructure projects. You'd imagine some of that will be spent on developing some of the shared academy facilities in Africa, etc. But could VSports pay for some of the developments around VP (e.g. shop, additional venue space) and then lease them to Villa? That would seem to de-link us from the initial expenses (whether or not they might be taken into account by FFP) but still allow us to claim any additional revenue / profits on our balance sheet. Meanwhile VSports gets rental income to balance their books and to fund other projects benefitting us and other teams within the VSports network. We have in the past tried secondary ticketing platforms but the club gave up on it. And the club shop/shirts have been run by fanatics for a good few years and the advantages seem to be debatable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ender4 Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 3 minutes ago, allani said: And that of course doesn't touch on how the £100m will be used on infrastructure projects. Doesn't the £100m purchase price just go to the shareholders who sold their shares ie: NSWE? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephen_Evans Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 2 minutes ago, ender4 said: Doesn't the £100m purchase price just go to the shareholders who sold their shares ie: NSWE? Depends if the company creates the shares for the new shareholders to buy or the existing shareholders sell some of theirs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allani Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 14 minutes ago, ender4 said: Doesn't the £100m purchase price just go to the shareholders who sold their shares ie: NSWE? The initial announcement specifically said it was going to be used on infrastructure projects. The behaviour of our owners to date, the recent comments from NS about owning a football team not being about making money and it becoming a passion and the net worth of both owners (for whom £50m would equate to a relatively small percentage of their paper wealth) - doesn't make me think that they are cashing in the cheque for themselves. I think this is all about getting another huge partner (Comcast) engaged with the club in the most advantageous way possible (for NSWE, Villa and Comcast) rather than our owners looking to cash in some chips. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allani Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 21 minutes ago, The Fun Factory said: We have in the past tried secondary ticketing platforms but the club gave up on it. And the club shop/shirts have been run by fanatics for a good few years and the advantages seem to be debatable. Yeah but in the past we didn't (indirectly) own the secondary ticketing platform. There are frequent debates on this forum about how **** our ticket office is. I suspect that we've got better access to more people who have experience of implementing a secondary platform now and that (at a senior level) there would be more drive to push through the changes. Also given that we'd have an (indirect) ownership link with the platform provider - then you would imagine that we'd get better terms with regard to how much of the ticket price we keep than we would with a third party provider - especially if Comcast are looking to use us as a way to break into the UK / European market (I don't know how big their ticketing platform is on this side of the Atlantic). I am glad that Fanatics are out - but I think we'd be in a much stronger position through our ties with Comcast to look at utilising specialist providers to reduce costs without necessarily losing a big chunk of the potential profits. We were nothing but just another client to Fanatics (and with our league standing probably not a massively important one). Whereas we are part of the Comcast universe allbeit with some clever jiggery-pockery around actual ownership ties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wishywashy Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 (edited) 2 hours ago, allani said: Comcast own the sports stadium in Philadelphia and implemented a number of projects for raising revenue around the stadium (naming rights to the scoreboard, other parts of the stadium, etc), they also own a ticketing company (which all the teams using the stadium now use) and also are heavily involved in sports media / broadcasting. So you can see why they would be of interest for us to partner with given their considerable experience of revenue generation within the sports arena. My gut feel is that Comcast will become a major vehicle for us expanding our revenues through a number of the channels in which they have expertise. Rather than us paying for all these services the Atairos deal potentially (indirectly) means that Comcast have skin in the game and so there is a bigger incentive for them to charge us less but deliver more. I remember at the time of the initial announcement there was a slightly odd comment about Atairos buying a minority ownership of VSports and that the ownership of Aston Villa remained unaffected. Which does make me wonder whether that has been done so that there is no direct ownership issue between Comcast and Villa - making it easier for Comcast or their subsiduaries to conclude deals with Villa without their being a "conflict of interest" debate? I would be quite surprised if we don't move our ticketing platform or find ourselves with some new shirt / ground sponsors in the near future. And that of course doesn't touch on how the £100m will be used on infrastructure projects. You'd imagine some of that will be spent on developing some of the shared academy facilities in Africa, etc. But could VSports pay for some of the developments around VP (e.g. shop, additional venue space) and then lease them to Villa? That would seem to de-link us from the initial expenses (whether or not they might be taken into account by FFP) but still allow us to claim any additional revenue / profits on our balance sheet. Meanwhile VSports gets rental income to balance their books and to fund other projects benefitting us and other teams within the VSports network. It's all very interesting. Angelakis even said in the announcement that "We are excited to bring our expertise in supporting businesses in the leisure, sports, and live entertainment industries to elevate the Club to even greater heights.", which does pretty strongly indicate that Atairos-Comcast will be getting involved in those departments as you say. It's just the infrastructure one that's a bit of an unknown. We already had massive plans for the club shop/venue spaces and so on, with the new North Stand and the 'Villa Live' BOXPARK. Both projects have been scrapped in favour of just retrofitting a café and a small venue within the Academy building: and maybe a new club shop somewhere. I don't think you need the assistance of a new owner with expertise in sports media/entertainment venues investing £100m to help with that! It does really make me wonder whether the club are exploring a new stadium entirely. It's the sort of project that would ideally benefit from that sort of arrangement, and it would go a long way to explaining why the Villa Park plans have been scrapped. Edited February 19 by wishywashy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thabucks Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 (edited) Keep reading we’ve downgraded from Villa Live to the warehouse when in reality the capacity of both is the same of circa 3000 … only thing missing is the interactive museum part of Villa Live which IMO isn’t a huge loss right now tbh. Club shop is doubling in size this summer. Villa Live was a nice idea but reality is imo we are better served going down the route we are. Edited February 19 by thabucks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andycv Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 23 minutes ago, thabucks said: Club shop is doubling in size this summer. I have seen Chris Heck say that too - but there isn't a planning application in place for this - so will they use the existing footprint of the building and just expand within that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wishywashy Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 39 minutes ago, thabucks said: Keep reading we’ve downgraded from Villa Live to the warehouse when in reality the capacity of both is the same of circa 3000 … only thing missing is the interactive museum part of Villa Live which IMO isn’t a huge loss right now tbh. Club shop is doubling in size this summer. Villa Live was a nice idea but reality is imo we are better served going down the route we are. The Warehouse is definitely a cost-effective approach, but it'd definitely be a bit surprising if that and a (potential) club shop expansion was the scale of infrastructure they were talking about, given what Atairos have invested. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allani Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 3 hours ago, wishywashy said: It's all very interesting. Angelakis even said in the announcement that "We are excited to bring our expertise in supporting businesses in the leisure, sports, and live entertainment industries to elevate the Club to even greater heights.", which does pretty strongly indicate that Atairos-Comcast will be getting involved in those departments as you say. It's just the infrastructure one that's a bit of an unknown. We already had massive plans for the club shop/venue spaces and so on, with the new North Stand and the 'Villa Live' BOXPARK. Both projects have been scrapped in favour of just retrofitting a café and a small venue within the Academy building: and maybe a new club shop somewhere. I don't think you need the assistance of a new owner with expertise in sports media/entertainment venues investing £100m to help with that! It does really make me wonder whether the club are exploring a new stadium entirely. It's the sort of project that would ideally benefit from that sort of arrangement, and it would go a long way to explaining why the Villa Park plans have been scrapped. Unless they are the kind of projects that Aston Villa can afford to develop bit our new "indirect owners" with big pockets and relevant expertise can then pursue their own development projects and then lease them to Villa? I do think we'll see several of the things that have been implemented in Philadelphia applied to Villa Park in the short-term as they will allow revenue to be raised for relatively little outlay (if any - e.g. my understanding is that Comcast actually paid for the manufacture and installation of the scoreboard at the Wells Fargo stadium) and quite quickly. But I agree that the deal makes even more sense with a bigger project. I don't entirely know how easy it would be for Comcast to build a multi-sports / leisure / entertainment stadium close to Aston and then lease it to Villa. Would that make the process harder than us doing it? Does it really fit with the spirit of FFP? But then does FFP really fit in with the spirit of fair competition if clubs are worried about investment projects that might inadvertently hit on FFP issues? I don't know but it does kind of feel like the Comcast thing does give us more options to explore that could de-risk things for us. If we are that close on FFP for this year - it certainly explains why the club wouldn't be able to afford any reduction in capacity over the next two seasons even if that means a bigger capacity from then on. And it also explains why Heck wouldn't be able to directly say that and would have to announce another reason for the redevelopment being put on hold. In which case fans pushing / demanding a clearer explanation might actually be putting the club in more difficulty than we should be? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allani Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 1 hour ago, wishywashy said: The Warehouse is definitely a cost-effective approach, but it'd definitely be a bit surprising if that and a (potential) club shop expansion was the scale of infrastructure they were talking about, given what Atairos have invested. Agreed. It all smacks of something bigger being in the offing somewhere / somehow. The potential involvement of extra parties also probably makes it even more difficult for anything to be openly communicated almost until it gets to the point that it needs to for legal / contractual reasons. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts