Increasing Club Revenue

[The Fun Factory]

9 minutes ago, cheltenham_villa said:

i agree, the goal has to be making villa park a location used more than 20 times a year. We need to compete with areas like the NEC/NIA (whatever either is now called) and WWE and sporting events are a big part of that. The big challenge is probably transport, im still interested to hear how an additional 10k are going to get to the ground on a match day. The same restriction would exist for non football events i assume. 

Winning some cup games would be a  start. As part of the redevelopment application, they said that they will look into improving Witton station capacity, but ultimately that is not in Villa's control. They also said that in the short to medium term they would arrange buses from the stadium back to the city centre (mate) before and after the match.

[cheltenham_villa]

2 minutes ago, The Fun Factory said:

Winning some cup games would be a  start. As part of the redevelopment application, they said that they will look into improving Witton station capacity, but ultimately that is not in Villa's control. They also said that in the short to medium term they would arrange buses from the stadium back to the city centre (mate) before and after the match.

Putting on Buses is an easy thing to say but a difficult thing to implement. For only the extra 10k fans this would need villa to find c200 buses lying around that arent already being used on a match day. 

This is where I think encouraging fans to arrive early and stay late is key. Look at how many fans head to the exits early.

 

[Demitri_C]

Tottenham is a utter dump. I hate going there. They are putting a lot of money in to re-generate the area but its quite dangerous. I wouldnt walk round there late at night.

They do have a lot of qays to get around though on public transport.  Thats the one thing i hate about villa park is the  public transport getting there and back. Its pretty shocking

[ender4]

45 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

They do have a lot of qays to get around though on public transport. 

Is this what the Q in LGBTQ stands for? 

[DJBOB]

20 hours ago, Marka Ragnos said:

I hate to sound like a downer about this topic, but I do think Aston Villa's own particular "brand" will always have a comparably low ceiling globally, whereas I can see local brands outside of England--strategically seeded by Villa--only increasing in recognition and commercial power. We're much more likely capitalise on growth by investing in completely autonomous and separate and LOCALISED -- in terms of branding, not financials -- clubs outside the UK.   

It's a complicated thing, but the the brands themselves of mid-table and even top clubs from the Premier League reaching a certain level of salience (in the USA, for example, where I live) will always end up being victims of their own success. That's a good thing. For a club like Villa, well, I think it's a big ask to move upwards in recognition any more than incrementally. 

It's the liberating nature of the game itself that's to blame, if you ask me.

When a bunch of kids play a weekend pickup game at our local schoolyard, they might wear, at first, their Chelsea or Man United kits or whatever. But they're not idiots. Very soon,  they realise, hey, I can go see a professional match in Philadelphia or Columbus or Austin or wherever in my own backyard. The MLS and college and local kits come out.

Why should I wear this dumb kit from a club in a far-away place, they think, with no connection to me and whose players generally don't give a shit about my world?

So, once kids get lit up about "soccer," you really think they're going to pour that excitement into an enterprise many of them couldn't even find on a map? No ****-ing way on earth. The game in their own country may not have the quality of the Premier League, but it has the power of proximity and cultural familiarity.

Localised branding is the only way commercial global growth will work.       

And believe it or not (and don't trust the American Premier League-carrying TV networks to whisper this), but all those manufactured "Premier League At Disney" sort of events to make it look like the Premier League is at some kind of cultural tipping point in the USA, for example, they end up primarily helping to seed local soccer's incredible growth. And that's a good thing, once again.

I don't want an American "Aston Villa," that's for sure. But a Detroit or Pittsburgh or Shreveport-based club connected financially with Villa could be amazing. MLS is growing here. The more the Premier League inspires kids in the USA, the more, eventually, the Premier League will help sow home-grown American soccer, not its own and certainly not Villa's  fame. The goal of commercial global growth should never be about raising the stature of Aston Villa. It should be about creating a meshed network of mutually beneficial relationships. I know, that's all sounding a bit David Brentish and "weekend corporate retreat-like," but there you go.   

There is some truth in this but the availability of watching premier league games online via Peacock (dread the service) and on live TV in America has really helped lift the status of certain clubs that would have otherwise been near impossible to try and watch live every weekend.

But I do agree that there are two buckets of 'fans' in America that should both be targeted by Villa. One would be the die-hards who are awake at 730/10 eastern time to watch Villa play and the other more casual fans who can more support a local team on regular times. 

While it won't match the draw of even the top 4 (NFL/NBA/MLB/NHL) in terms of attendance at a bar, even casual fans will turn on a marquee matchup if it is a 3pm eastern game or something similar.

[The_Steve]

Here’s more on the sheer immorality of white-label Asian gambling firms we should have no involvement with 

 

 

[MotoMkali]

On 01/03/2023 at 11:19, Demitri_C said:

Tottenham is a utter dump. I hate going there. They are putting a lot of money in to re-generate the area but its quite dangerous. I wouldnt walk round there late at night.

They do have a lot of qays to get around though on public transport.  Thats the one thing i hate about villa park is the  public transport getting there and back. Its pretty shocking

Takes 3/4 of an hour (or over an hour if you miss the first train) to go under 5 miles on the public transport system from UOB to Aston villa. It's ridiculous. 

[maqroll]

Hmmm..

 

[The_Steve]

Front of shirt gambling ban is objectively good. I'm all for it. I hope it brings wider bans. Gotta start somewhere. 

[ender4]

1 hour ago, maqroll said:

Hmmm..

 

So the Sky 6 clubs get non-betting firms sponsoring them for massive amounts of money. 

The Other 14 clubs have to be sponsored by betting firms to get even 20% of the sponsorship that the Sky 6 do. And now with this proposed ban, the Other 14 clubs sponsorship income will halve, making the gap between the 6 and the rest even bigger.

[NeilS]

I can't say I have heard of these people, but we have cancelled one betting partnership. This isn't because of the above though, more to do with them still trading in Russia after Ukraine sanctions.

We cut ties with Parimatch

EXCLUSIVE: Aston Villa terminate deal with betting firm Parimatch after they were sanctioned by Ukraine for operating in Russia... with Chelsea, Newcastle and Leicester also expected to cut ties with sponsor

Aston Villa have terminated their sponsorship deal with Parimatch after the betting firm were sanctioned by Ukraine, with Chelsea, Newcastle and Leicester expected to follow their lead shortly. 

The Cyprus-based sports tech company were one of 287 betting operators sanctioned for continuing to operate in Russia earlier this month, with President Zelensky accusing them of seeking to benefit financially from the invasion of Ukraine.

Sportsmail revealed a fortnight ago that Chelsea were reviewing their contract with Parimatch due to particularly sensitivity at Stamford Bridge over the Russian invasion, but Villa have moved quickest to sever ties. 

[JAMAICAN-VILLAN]

Lol

[The_Steve]

2 hours ago, NeilS said:

I can't say I have heard of these people, but we have cancelled one betting partnership. This isn't because of the above though, more to do with them still trading in Russia after Ukraine sanctions.

We cut ties with Parimatch

EXCLUSIVE: Aston Villa terminate deal with betting firm Parimatch after they were sanctioned by Ukraine for operating in Russia... with Chelsea, Newcastle and Leicester also expected to cut ties with sponsor

Aston Villa have terminated their sponsorship deal with Parimatch after the betting firm were sanctioned by Ukraine, with Chelsea, Newcastle and Leicester expected to follow their lead shortly. 

The Cyprus-based sports tech company were one of 287 betting operators sanctioned for continuing to operate in Russia earlier this month, with President Zelensky accusing them of seeking to benefit financially from the invasion of Ukraine.

Sportsmail revealed a fortnight ago that Chelsea were reviewing their contract with Parimatch due to particularly sensitivity at Stamford Bridge over the Russian invasion, but Villa have moved quickest to sever ties. 

Fire the due dilligence team tbh 

[Follyfoot]

17 hours ago, ender4 said:

So the Sky 6 clubs get non-betting firms sponsoring them for massive amounts of money. 

The Other 14 clubs have to be sponsored by betting firms to get even 20% of the sponsorship that the Sky 6 do. And now with this proposed ban, the Other 14 clubs sponsorship income will halve, making the gap between the 6 and the rest even bigger.

Thats the plan 

[CVByrne]

I hope we can still get our front of shirt sponsorship over the line before the voluntary ban on front of shirt sponsors comes in. We need the jump in revenue to help the club compete with the top clubs. 

[S-Platt]

3 minutes ago, CVByrne said:

I hope we can still get our front of shirt sponsorship over the line before the voluntary ban on front of shirt sponsors comes in. We need the jump in revenue to help the club compete with the top clubs. 

You would think shirts have already been made so it's going to cost a fortune to clubs if it comes in for next season.

[CVByrne]

3 minutes ago, S-Platt said:

You would think shirts have already been made so it's going to cost a fortune to clubs if it comes in for next season.

It was already reported it was a ban on any new sponsorship. So existing shirt sponsors can remain. So I assume it includes us and comes into effect after next years shirt deals are sorted.

[JAMAICAN-VILLAN]

Random thought as I never thought for a second it might be under consideration or possible this season.

If we do happen to qualify for Europe, I'm hoping ( expecting ) that we had the foresight to have clause's in all our commercial contracts which increase the levels exponentially. ( Or to get out of them altogether for new ones )

We don't want to sell ourselves short.

Was also wondering if, qualifying for Europe and having long runs in domestic Cups, could offsett closing off parts of the stadium for expansion project.

We would have less capacity, but more games, hosting and income to generate revenue.

Edited April 8, 2023 by JAMAICAN-VILLAN

[OutByEaster?]

In terms of revenue, closing the North Stand for a season will cost us about £7m or so - that it generates so little income is why it needs to go.

In terms of the clubs total income, that's going to be less than 5% during the year it's closed.

Commercial income is probably the area where I think we're performing least well as a club at the moment - on the pitch and structurally we're flying - but despite having a couple of the superstars of sponsorship in Purslow and Ibbetson, we're not bringing in the sorts of deals with the amounts you'd hope for - that might just be down to a difficult marketplace - but we could do with those two pushing us on.

 

 

[villaglint]

55 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

In terms of revenue, closing the North Stand for a season will cost us about £7m or so - that it generates so little income is why it needs to go.

In terms of the clubs total income, that's going to be less than 5% during the year it's closed.

Commercial income is probably the area where I think we're performing least well as a club at the moment - on the pitch and structurally we're flying - but despite having a couple of the superstars of sponsorship in Purslow and Ibbetson, we're not bringing in the sorts of deals with the amounts you'd hope for - that might just be down to a difficult marketplace - but we could do with those two pushing us on.

 

 

Hadn’t realised the whole stand would be a closed for a year. Guess that’ll make getting tickets very difficult for non season ticket holders. I’m currently a member and usually don’t have a problem and generally get to 7/8 home games in a year. But as season ticket holder numbers won’t change won’t be many to go round everyone else.