The Randy Lerner thread

[jim]

Might be sensible to redevelop before we begin to sell out regularly, though?

When was was the last time that happened?

We are light years away IMO.

[CI]

I really don't think we need anymore than 42500 seats

If we average 36k this season we will have done well

[Morpheus]

Agree with comment above that we should improve the squad first hopefully leading to more success in the cups and therefore attracting more support before improving the stadium. No point in building a new stand without the support to fill it. Look at the Olympics for instance!

[CrackpotForeigner]

I really think this will happen now.

If the club is going to grow its revenue in the long term it will need to improve stadium capacity. As others have said when the subject came up, it's a bit "build it and they will come" with stadiums. People will likely feel more inclined to go to games if they feel the club is on the up, and enlarging the stadium would send a powerful message. Also the atmosphere would improve and hence the matchday experience.

A side effect would be that the club could attract better players as a result, and really the whole thing could potentially snowball in the right circumstances.

Chicken or egg?

I can't believe that developing the stadium before the team and results improve would attract bigger crowds and better players, it's the other way round.

I think the point is that they feed off each other, to an extent.

Don't you think people would be more excited about supporting a club with a 50k stadium capacity than a 42k?

Yes it's true that the 42k stadium isn't full, but it's build-it-and-they-will-come, and there are more fans in a 90% full stadium with 50k capacity than there are in a 90% full stadium with 42k capacity.

Obviously we'd like to go about getting more fans by playing winning, attractive football, but we've been trying to do that since 1874 and it doesn't always work.

If you spend X million on stadium seats you get Y number of seats.

If you spend X million on players you may or may not get attractive, winning football, and even if you do, their contracts expire or they retire and you've done nothing SUSTAINABLE for the club.

[juanpabloangel18]

I really think this will happen now.

If the club is going to grow its revenue in the long term it will need to improve stadium capacity. As others have said when the subject came up, it's a bit "build it and they will come" with stadiums. People will likely feel more inclined to go to games if they feel the club is on the up, and enlarging the stadium would send a powerful message. Also the atmosphere would improve and hence the matchday experience.

A side effect would be that the club could attract better players as a result, and really the whole thing could potentially snowball in the right circumstances.

Chicken or egg?

I can't believe that developing the stadium before the team and results improve would attract bigger crowds and better players, it's the other way round.

1) Better players

2) Better results

3) Bigger crowds

4) Improve stadium

5) Go to (1)

Both of these contain elements of truth. Personally, I feel that doing something concrete (no pun intended) like increasing the stadium capacity is far more meaningful than signing a player or two. It would also represent a bit of a 'legacy' that Lerner could point to in decades to come. Of course, the financial viability of it all will be known only at Board level, but it's not our job to care about that

It would be absolutely fantastic.

[juanpabloangel18]

Agree with comment above that we should improve the squad first

Well, it's not necessarily to say that we have to choose between one or the other. If redeveloping meant 0 money for transfers for 12-24 months, obviously that would change things.

Also, by that logic, no stadiums would ever be improved/new ones built. Every single squad in the world could be improved, but sometimes investment in other areas of the club can be just as rewarding.

[CrackpotForeigner]

Agree with comment above that we should improve the squad first

Well, it's not necessarily to say that we have to choose between one or the other. If redeveloping meant 0 money for transfers for 12-24 months, obviously that would change things.

Exactly. Nobody's saying that the stadium should be developed at the expense of squad quality.

I guess whether you think it's worth doing or not depends on whether you believe it would tend to increase attendance in itself. Personally I believe it would.

[tommybo]

We can't fill 42,000. Redeveloping the North Stand would definitely make our great stadium look even better but that's about it. We wouldn't suddenly attract thousands more fans through the gates every home game just because we have a new stand.

I agree with what you're saying but isn't there also the possibility that having a bigger capacity could equal cheaper tickets and therefore attract more people on matchday? Just a thought...

[P3te]

Expanding the stadium at this point would be a waste, use the money to rebuild the squad first.

the flip side is that if you wait til we're filling the ground every week then the renovations will greatly damage us financially. better to do the work when it's not going to put that big a dent in the matchday revenue

[LockStockVilla]

We can't fill 42,000. Redeveloping the North Stand would definitely make our great stadium look even better but that's about it. We wouldn't suddenly attract thousands more fans through the gates every home game just because we have a new stand.

I agree with what you're saying but isn't there also the possibility that having a bigger capacity could equal cheaper tickets and therefore attract more people on matchday? Just a thought...

From a business POV, that wouldn't make the most of sense...the club would not be gaining as much if they just make tickets cheap enough for more people to come as they would if they field a competitive/entertaining squad that creates a higher demand of people wanting to watch it at Villa Park, and at the very least still charging what they charge atm.

[greyvillan]

We can't fill 42,000. Redeveloping the North Stand would definitely make our great stadium look even better but that's about it. We wouldn't suddenly attract thousands more fans through the gates every home game just because we have a new stand.

I agree with what you're saying but isn't there also the possibility that having a bigger capacity could equal cheaper tickets and therefore attract more people on matchday? Just a thought...

No dont see this, the huge investment required to build these things has to be paid back so usually that means higher prices not lower

[CrackpotForeigner]

No dont see this, the huge investment required to build these things has to be paid back so usually that means higher prices not lower

You mean paid back to Randy Lerner by Randy Lerner?

[juanpabloangel18]

But it also increases the value of the club overall and increases the potential for revenue over a long-term. That's alongside the fact that it increases the club's prestige, attractiveness, improves the match day experience, and may even lead to improved home form (speculative).

Consider how much Randy pissed away on players (transfers/wages) at MON's leisure. I'm sure we could have had a brand new stand for the net spend on Curtis Davies, Shorey, Heskey, Beye... (need I go on). Big investment is always a risk. Villa Park is a tangible object, player's form and performances are not.

[greyvillan]

No dont see this, the huge investment required to build these things has to be paid back so usually that means higher prices not lower

You mean paid back to Randy Lerner by Randy Lerner?

Yes unless Randy is making a charitable donation, which I havent seen so far he will want to make a business case for the expenditure, which would require some form of payback over a set period of time

[CrackpotForeigner]

No dont see this, the huge investment required to build these things has to be paid back so usually that means higher prices not lower

You mean paid back to Randy Lerner by Randy Lerner?

Yes unless Randy is making a charitable donation, which I havent seen so far he will want to make a business case for the expenditure, which would require some form of payback over a set period of time

Surely, seeing as RL is the sole owner of the club, and the club is running at a loss, any expenditure comes out of Randy's pocket in the end, however he chooses to dress it up for tax porpoises.

[CrackpotForeigner]

But it also increases the value of the club overall and increases the potential for revenue over a long-term. That's alongside the fact that it increases the club's prestige, attractiveness, improves the match day experience, and may even lead to improved home form (speculative).

Consider how much Randy pissed away on players (transfers/wages) at MON's leisure. I'm sure we could have had a brand new stand for the net spend on Curtis Davies, Shorey, Heskey, Beye... (need I go on). Big investment is always a risk. Villa Park is a tangible object, player's form and performances are not.

If you're going to agree with me, why not just quote me and save yourself some trouble?

[Mazrim]

We averaged 40,000 watching O'Neill's limited football so in theory we could average higher with some decent football on show.

Besides which, improving the facilities is only a good thing and adding capacity means higher gates for games we do fill, even if its full of visiting glory hunting scum, its still good money.

[TrentVilla]

The very first thing Lerner should have done when he arrived following sorting out BMH is extend the ground. If becoming self sustainable from income was the plan then spending should have first been committed to ways of allowing is to maximise revenue from later spending on the team.

That he didn't do this of Lerner's biggest mistakes of which there have been a number.

[Ads]

It would be better to sell out a 52,000 seater seven times a season than a 42,000.

[FamousHolteUnion]

We got nowhere near consistently selling out last season, why extend the ground? It would be great for us and if we managed to start selling out a lot and need a bigger ground, then great but when we were averaging 30k last season we dont need a 50k+ stadium yet. Even if the North is atrocious.