mrchnry Posted April 11 Share Posted April 11 It's £68 for a seat for the Chelsea game. An 8pm, televised kick off. The ceiling to how much someone will pay per match is surely close. The season ticket waiting list it massive. I've been on it for 3 seasons now and I'm in the ten thousands. After last sunmers renewals and offering the waiting list season tickets, I moved 1000 places. There is a lot of money waiting to be paid if there were more seats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ender4 Posted April 11 Share Posted April 11 6 minutes ago, mrchnry said: It's £68 for a seat for the Chelsea game. An 8pm, televised kick off. The ceiling to how much someone will pay per match is surely close. The season ticket waiting list it massive. I've been on it for 3 seasons now and I'm in the ten thousands. After last sunmers renewals and offering the waiting list season tickets, I moved 1000 places. There is a lot of money waiting to be paid if there were more seats. I think we have hit the limit of pricing to gain more money. So its either: A new stadium with 20k extra season tickets and great facilities = £25m extra revenue per season but costs £1 billion. A new North stand = £6m extra revenue per season but costs £120 million. Leave it as it is = £0 extra revenue. And people still can't get a pie or pint at the ground. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GlobalVillan Posted April 11 Share Posted April 11 (edited) 2 hours ago, Jareth said: Seems quite obvious to me. If the current ground is not being redeveloped in a substantial way then the vision currently held by those that decide, must be to build new elsewhere. Birmingham was once touted as the home of the new national stadium, Villa go and build exactly that then they get all the tour bookings and non-football business you could want with folks travelling from north south east and west into the heart of England. I think they are going to go huge on this. But obvs not as huge as blues new stadium course. The only nationl stadium this country will ever have is Wembley. Its a fools errand to build huge stadium in Birmingham and think anyone will give a shit or take any notice, much less use it for semi finals or England games. It just won't happen. We could do with a 50k stadium for ourselves and we can do that by expanding Villa Park. We do not need a new stadium. Edited April 11 by GlobalVillan 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinker Posted April 11 VT Supporter Share Posted April 11 1 hour ago, nick76 said: Who’s standing still? just because we aren’t building a shiny new stadium doesn’t mean we are standing still as a club. Look who's on that list. They are all top 6 clubs, we are the only one with no plan whether that be a new ground or a development of the existing. The problem with the later is we need somewhere to play and the income it generates while the development is underway, a new ground gets around that issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nick76 Posted April 11 Share Posted April 11 8 minutes ago, tinker said: Look who's on that list. They are all top 6 clubs, we are the only one with no plan whether that be a new ground or a development of the existing. The problem with the later is we need somewhere to play and the income it generates while the development is underway, a new ground gets around that issue. We currently aren’t profitable and nowhere near self sustaining and those clubs have far greater revenues than us to support that development cost, that’s why we aren’t doing it. Doing this would financially damage our club with no real start of return for at least five years until it’s built. I just don’t see the viable business case at the moment. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mic09 Posted April 11 Share Posted April 11 3 minutes ago, nick76 said: We currently aren’t profitable and nowhere near self sustaining and those clubs have far greater revenues than us to support that development cost, that’s why we aren’t doing it. Doing this would financially damage our club with no real start of return for at least five years until it’s built. I just don’t see the viable business case at the moment. It wouldn't financially damage the club. It might financially damage the owners. But that in itself is unlikely, if Villa is worth 600-700m now, with the new stand, the new hospitality, new sponsors, I can see that value increasing to over 1bn rather quickly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nick76 Posted April 11 Share Posted April 11 1 hour ago, DakotaVilla said: From the owners perspective, they won’t necessarily be worried about the debt involved in building a new stadium or even the debt that would be required to rebuild Villa Park to an acceptable level. The only questions they will have about the debt is: - What rate can they get on the debt and can the debt be serviced through increased revenue that the new stadium and will it provide positive cash flow? (Look at spurs. They have huge debt of nearly 700m but their positive cash flow is now insane and their annual interest charge is circa only 20m) - How much will the stadium cost and will it increase the overall value of their asset and in that context is it worth it? (Again, look at spurs and how much the new stadium would have increased the clubs valuation. Absolutely more than was spent on the stadium because of the insane cash flow generated). The fundamentals for Villa v spurs are slightly different due to Birmingham v London, higher interest rates and higher build costs but for me there’s no way in the world the owners wouldn’t make an absolute shit load of money if they built a new stadium. Whereas I’m not convinced the owners would make a shit load of money and would likely put too much financial pressure on the Villa. Comparing us to Spurs and the London bit isn’t a true comparison imo but if the owners do, then go for it but I think there is a reason they aren’t otherwise knowing these owners they would given their ambitions. The owners wouldn’t just not do it because some of the fans wanted to stay at Villa Park, I think they, at the moment, see the business case stacks up imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nick76 Posted April 11 Share Posted April 11 2 minutes ago, Mic09 said: It wouldn't financially damage the club. It might financially damage the owners. But that in itself is unlikely, if Villa is worth 600-700m now, with the new stand, the new hospitality, new sponsors, I can see that value increasing to over 1bn rather quickly. Of course it would financially damage the club, I don’t see how you can’t see that. Unless the owners fully fund the stadium build which, even though the owners are brilliant, they aren’t going to personally finance a new £1bn stadium thus the only other party will be Villa through whatever financial instrument. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mic09 Posted April 11 Share Posted April 11 Just now, nick76 said: Of course it would financially damage the club, I don’t see how you can’t see that. Unless the owners fully fund the stadium build which, even though the owners are brilliant, they aren’t going to personally finance a new £1bn stadium thus the only other party will be Villa through whatever financial instrument. Sorry, my bad - I was thinking about the new stand! Yes, a new stadium is a different story. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeyp102 Posted April 11 Share Posted April 11 4 hours ago, Hughes said: Moved from apparently wrong forum: surely, respective owners cannot be discussing a ground share arrangement? Plans to redevelop North Stand cancelled/suspended and Blues in the same time period getting new ownership who secures a large land plot rather central in Brum - we all agree that a new super-stadium quite simply does not make any sense for Blues alone. Not saying this will happen at all, and most likely I am just paranoid, but strange and not really explained decision on North Stand coupled with unrealistic new stadium for Blues.... Foreign owners involving US fund structures could be the ones to do such a crazy thing. So, in order to stay within topic: Could that be a new Villa stadium? I said similar, and something I could see Heck proposing. I just hope he’d get laughed out of brum for the suggestion 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinker Posted April 11 VT Supporter Share Posted April 11 (edited) 21 minutes ago, nick76 said: We currently aren’t profitable and nowhere near self sustaining and those clubs have far greater revenues than us to support that development cost, that’s why we aren’t doing it. Doing this would financially damage our club with no real start of return for at least five years until it’s built. I just don’t see the viable business case at the moment. It's either development of a new ground or the old one and both come with hard to solve issues but we need to solve them one way or another and that's what great leaders do, solve difficult issues. You don't and we won't get anywhere by waiting 5 years, the problem will just grow bigger. Emery goes and we're just another Leeds, sitting in an old ground with no revenue from it hoping to self fund with a top 4 finish year on year isn't a solution, dining on the glory days we/they had a lifetime ago. Edited April 11 by tinker 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jareth Posted April 11 Share Posted April 11 1 hour ago, GlobalVillan said: The only nationl stadium this country will ever have is Wembley. Its a fools errand to build huge stadium in Birmingham and think anyone will give a shit or take any notice, much less use it for semi finals or England games. It just won't happen. We could do with a 50k stadium for ourselves and we can do that by expanding Villa Park. We do not need a new stadium. Lots of huge new stadiums recently built in London, nearer to Wembley than us, Wembley is not a competitor to them. The national stadium ref was to do with where is it easiest for the most people to travel to. Taylor Swift concerts for example, they locate them in such places. I would wager that location would be the centre of England- and that a new stadium can generate money when we are not watching football in it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MapleVilla Posted April 11 Share Posted April 11 The main problem with that idea (other than sharing a stadium with such a small club who are rivals) is that their revenue is no where near ours. We'd be paying for most of the operating costs. Not like the San Siro where both teams are usually towards top end of the league and in some sort of European competitions most of the time. It would maybe solve quite a few problems, but I think would also cause an uproar and a magnitude of other ones as well. I think the Sty plans are literally just that. They still think they're going to be in the Premier League at some point soon and will have the need for a bigger stadium......even though they're the wrong end of the table and no where near filling the current shed they have. Even if they have a remarkable season next year and get promoted. They're not building for a promotion. They haven't got the money to build a squad capable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nick76 Posted April 11 Share Posted April 11 7 minutes ago, tinker said: It's either development of a new ground or the old one and both come with hard to solve issues but we need to solve them one way or another and that's what great leaders do, solve difficult issues. You don't and we won't get anywhere by waiting 5 years, the problem will just grow bigger. Emery goes and we're just another Leeds, sitting in an old ground with no revenue from it hoping to self fund with a top 4 finish year on year isn't a solution, dining on the glory days we/they had a lifetime ago. I don’t believe the business case for a new stadium stacks up. The redevelopment of the North Stand did imo but the club has paused the second and said the first isn’t happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nick76 Posted April 11 Share Posted April 11 3 minutes ago, Jareth said: Lots of huge new stadiums recently built in London, nearer to Wembley than us, Wembley is not a competitor to them. The national stadium ref was to do with where is it easiest for the most people to travel to. Taylor Swift concerts for example, they locate them in such places. I would wager that location would be the centre of England- and that a new stadium can generate money when we are not watching football in it. Like we do already you mean given the Pink, Foo Fighters and Springsteen concerts at Villa Park! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeroesAndVillans Posted April 11 Share Posted April 11 Not sure I will ever get a season ticket- I'll be happy to go to a match whenever the opportunity comes up! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jareth Posted April 11 Share Posted April 11 5 minutes ago, nick76 said: Like we do already you mean given the Pink, Foo Fighters and Springsteen concerts at Villa Park! Old swifty is seating 50k a night - I'd wager Pink is a fraction of that. Yes that's right we ARE having a very mature, male argument here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nick76 Posted April 11 Share Posted April 11 21 minutes ago, Jareth said: Old swifty is seating 50k a night - I'd wager Pink is a fraction of that. Yes that's right we ARE having a very mature, male argument here. I’ve seen the pics from that gig and they had Doug Ellis, Trinity, Holte End and all the pitch area for fans. I’m guessing that was comparable to 50k fans or more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinker Posted April 11 VT Supporter Share Posted April 11 1 hour ago, nick76 said: I don’t believe the business case for a new stadium stacks up. The redevelopment of the North Stand did imo but the club has paused the second and said the first isn’t happening. They paused the north stand because they didn't want to disrupt our on field progress, if we get into Europe a building site behind the goal isn't going to look good. They will have an answer to the problem we just haven't heard it yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted April 11 Moderator Share Posted April 11 Folks, I think most of the stuff that's in here can now be discussed in the Villa Park Redevelopment thread. If anything tangible comes up about us building a new stadium, we can re-open this one, but general debate about Villa Park is better in there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts