OutByEaster? Posted February 21 Moderator Share Posted February 21 2 minutes ago, thabucks said: Brian little famously said he wasn’t going to leave Leicester to manage Villa only to join a day or two later … Who knows what’s being discussed behind closed doors & corridors of power. NSWE looked at moving reportedly when they first purchased the club and maybe it is something with our new partners whose parent company specialise in the field may look at again. It's possible of course - but they're been consistent directly and across two GM's now that they see Villa Park as the clubs home both now and in future. Where were the reports on Villa moving when they purchased the club? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted February 21 Share Posted February 21 15 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said: I would be very surprised if that's the case. The club have stated it's not something they are considering and have further stated that they never see us leaving Villa Park. It's increasingly odd to me that the club backed out of plans to develop a single stand on the basis that they were too ambitious and the fanbase have taken that disappointment to mean not ambitious enough. The reaction borders on the peculiar. "We're not buying a new Ford Focus this year, the old one is perfectly suitable for the driving we're doing". "Wait, you mean....we're buying a Ferrari?" It's absolutely baffling. I think I've run out of ways to write 'it isn't happening, the club have said repeatedly and explicitly it isn't happening, none of the background work that would be necessary is happening'. Ultimately whatever is causing this bizarre belief that we're about to move, what will eventually kill it off is the dawning realisation that it keeps not happening. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
It's Your Round Posted February 21 Share Posted February 21 Every time it doesn’t happen, brings us closer to the day it does. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaChris Posted February 21 Author Share Posted February 21 1 hour ago, WallisFrizz said: Much of the infrastructure was temporary. Spectators were shuttle bussed in. There’s is even less parking near there and only one small train station. Not saying it is impossible but I’m not convinced it would be a good location for a 50k stadium or at least not significantly better than where we are now. That site is even more boxed in than VP with access roads. As you say Perry Barr is walkable but only station within two miles. It can handle a few Athletics meets a year with 20k but couldn't see that location handling 60k every two weeks unless everyone just came on the 51! Guess it's the same for buying Star City and building on that site. And further out you go towards Castle Brom the infrastructure simply isn't there the more you go away from the city centre. If we eventually have to move we have to find a site 10-15 minutes walking time closer to the City Centre but simply don't know how possible that is. Would be ideal if there was a site close to Aston University for example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lichfield Dean Posted February 21 VT Supporter Share Posted February 21 1 hour ago, wishywashy said: There were rumours a while ago that were looking at the Alexander Stadium to host the games for the women's team, but nothing came of it and we (a bit surprisingly imo) extended the Bescot lease. I think a rugby team plays there now. It's an athletics stadium and that's what it should remain. It's not like the London Olympics stadium that didn't exist beforehand. The rugby appears not to happen in the main stadium at all but in the small warmup area area to the side. Can't see how that would be appropriate for our women's team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mic09 Posted February 21 Share Posted February 21 8 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said: Well that's true I guess and maybe I'm just being a bit negative about it. Think positive. After Man Utd get their brand new Wembley of the North, we will get a government funded Wembley of the Midlands. After which, Norwich get a Wembley of East Anglia, and Plymouth get a Wembley of the south west. You know, to level up. Everyone gets a Wembley! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinker Posted February 21 VT Supporter Share Posted February 21 A new stadium would have to be built by the NEC, the airport and the HS2 terminal, its got everything there, resort world would be packed to the rafters. Its 10 minutes on the train from the city centre and 40 minutes from Central London via the HS2. Its a no brainer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThunderPower_14 Posted February 21 Share Posted February 21 4 hours ago, OutByEaster? said: If Man Utd get public funding to rebuild Old Trafford it'll be a national disgrace. I know the standard in the UK is that publicly money isn't used for club stadiums, but I don't really agree. Manchester United would have provided an absolutely enormous amount to the economy in Manchester over the journey. Major sporting stadiums everywhere else in the world rely on public funding, with the stadium effectively a partnership between the local/state/county government and the team, acknowledging the economic benefits brought to the area by the major professional sports team. Almost all NBA and NFL stadiums were built at least partly using public money. Every single stadium in Australia is publicly owned and redevelopments are entirely publicly funded. Those stadiums bring events and tourism, they bring legions of fans to the area on matchdays, they fill up the surrounding pubs and restaurants. People will attend a city they'd never otherwise attend for a game and stay for a weekend, spending money in the area. They are a point of pride for the area, and the club is likely followed by a big percentage of constituents. Why shouldn't stadiums receive public funding? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thunderball Posted February 24 Share Posted February 24 (edited) They would be mad to not explore a brand new stadium, of course they are. They can legitimately say they have no plans to leave until an application for a new ground is in hand - plausible denial. Villa Park needs so much to bring up to what is needed for the modern sporting experience, any money spent is a waste. I suspect they will explore options if we regularly look like qualifying for CL. Our owners are the real deal, they won’t do things by half or fight with one arm behind their back. Edited February 24 by thunderball 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Villa_Vids Posted February 28 Share Posted February 28 Gabby now advocating a move to a new 70k stadium. 70k is far too big for this stage in our development - 50-60k is a fair range. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post bannedfromHandV Posted February 28 Popular Post Share Posted February 28 Obviously I’d be gutted to leave VP but you can’t stand in the way of progress and if it kicks us on a level then we have to accept it 7 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted February 29 VT Supporter Share Posted February 29 Can we rename this thread the “people talking about a new stadium that isn’t going to happen?” thread please? 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mic09 Posted February 29 Share Posted February 29 38 minutes ago, Stevo985 said: Can we rename this thread the “people talking about a new stadium that isn’t going to happen?” thread please? But it will happen. Probably not now, maybe in 30-50 years, but it will most likely eventually happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David-Copenhagen Posted February 29 Share Posted February 29 3 hours ago, Stevo985 said: Can we rename this thread the “people talking about a new stadium that isn’t going to happen?” thread please? If it does not happen in the near future, then we are left behind. I don't like it, but there are really little alternatives. To compete, we need to make money. A new stadium makes more money. And money rules the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephen_Evans Posted February 29 Share Posted February 29 16 hours ago, Villa_Vids said: Gabby now advocating a move to a new 70k stadium. 70k is far too big for this stage in our development - 50-60k is a fair range. Has he heard insider whispers I wonder? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thabucks Posted February 29 Share Posted February 29 I think that if we manage to maintain a sustained period of competitiveness & growth then the topic of a new stadium will IMO become pertinent. Now it’s just pie in the sky fantasy. Fighting to be at the top of the table regularly would make a compelling business argument whereas, currently we the numbers just wouldn’t stack up. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheltenham_villa Posted February 29 Share Posted February 29 11 hours ago, David-Copenhagen said: If it does not happen in the near future, then we are left behind. I don't like it, but there are really little alternatives. To compete, we need to make money. A new stadium makes more money. And money rules the game. They do also cost money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post MaVilla Posted March 1 Popular Post Share Posted March 1 (edited) they just need to build a new stadium. i dont think the footprint of Villa Park will ever be big enough to accomodate everything a modern stadium really needs. The only way it could be done i reckon, is to knock Villa Park down and build an entirely new stadium on its spot, other than that, its a new stadium somewhere else, if we ever want to reach the next level stadium/revenue wise. Edited March 1 by MaVilla 5 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ender4 Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 Chelsea have decided that it’s not feasible to slowly redevelop their current stadium. They are now planning to make a long-term decision between: 1 - build a brand new 60k+ stadium on new site at Earls Court - £500m to buy the land and £1 billion to build the stadium - total cost £1.5 billion. 2 - Move away from Stamford Bridge to a temporary home (probably Wembley) for 6 years. Completely knock down current stadium and build brand new on the same site at a cost of £1 billion. Nearly every club is thinking about a bigger better stadium or have already done that recently. Will we do something similar? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Villa_Vids Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 23 minutes ago, ender4 said: Chelsea have decided that it’s not feasible to slowly redevelop their current stadium. They are now planning to make a long-term decision between: 1 - build a brand new 60k+ stadium on new site at Earls Court - £500m to buy the land and £1 billion to build the stadium - total cost £1.5 billion. 2 - Move away from Stamford Bridge to a temporary home (probably Wembley) for 6 years. Completely knock down current stadium and build brand new on the same site at a cost of £1 billion. Nearly every club is thinking about a bigger better stadium or have already done that recently. Will we do something similar? Yh. I have seen that Forest have considered moving to a new stadium as their redevelopment plans are being hindered by local government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts