Stadium Redevelopment Stalls.

[Daniel1Avfc]

 

 

No point redeveloping villa park especially to increase capacity. Its too big for us as it is!

51,000 capacity Villa Park stadium could be sold out easily, with ticket price reductions.

 

To be fair there have been occasions this season where the club have sold tickets for £10 per person and we still haven't sold out. How cheap do you want them to be exactly lol?

 

As cheap as the bundesliga. 

[daggy_333]

 

 

 

No point redeveloping villa park especially to increase capacity. Its too big for us as it is!

51,000 capacity Villa Park stadium could be sold out easily, with ticket price reductions.

 

To be fair there have been occasions this season where the club have sold tickets for £10 per person and we still haven't sold out. How cheap do you want them to be exactly lol?

 

As cheap as the bundesliga. 

 

I'm fairly sure the £10 per person offer they do occasionally beats the Bundesliga prices?

[Daniel1Avfc]

 

 

 

 

No point redeveloping villa park especially to increase capacity. Its too big for us as it is!

51,000 capacity Villa Park stadium could be sold out easily, with ticket price reductions.

 

To be fair there have been occasions this season where the club have sold tickets for £10 per person and we still haven't sold out. How cheap do you want them to be exactly lol?

 

As cheap as the bundesliga. 

 

I'm fairly sure the £10 per person offer they do occasionally beats the Bundesliga prices?

 

Not once in a blue moon single ticket offers, im talking about season tickets.

[The Fun Factory]

 

I doubt it would cost that much to at least repaint the cladding claret and blue or something so it at least looks more in-sync with the rest of the Stadia, and less like a random 1970's council office building. 

 

 

They have recladded the building and cleaned up the concrete.  It would help if you picked a photo that wasn't ten years old. 

 

 

 

 

It looks more like this these days.  Yes, it is still a 1970s brutalist office complex, but it's functional.  I'd hope when it does get rebuilt then we will see a red brick facade like the Holte end has but the implication that Villa Park is a bad looking stadium is laughable because even from it's ugliest corner (this photograph) it is still better than most grounds. 

 

From that angle it looks fairly easy to whack in seats in the corner, but on the trinity side I always wonder if there is the space? Makes you think when the redid the doug ellis/witton lane  in the 1990s they could have just carried on and filled in the corner, and properly connected it up with the Holte at the other end. Then you could have kept the old Triniity in a Horseshoe type design with bascially the same capacity as now.

[The_Rev]

On the Trinity Road side there is significantly more space to fill the corner in because it would all be on land owned by the club. 

 

 

I'm not sure how much the work on the Doug Ellis stand side would disrupt the flow of traffic on Witton Lane. 

[Raymond]

No point redeveloping villa park especially to increase capacity. Its too big for us as it is!

51,000 capacity Villa Park stadium could be sold out easily, with ticket price reductions.

This is such a BS line of thought. You can get a season ticket in the lower Holte for 500, about 26 a match, and you can pay in 9 month interest free installments. I pay more in the US in special subscriptions to my satellite company and fox soccer to see Villa on a screen.

If 500 is too rich for your blood, they have special value seats for 325, or 17 a match.

And, finally, I assume you could do what people in the states do with season tickets. Scalp the tickets to United, Chelsea, Arsenal, and Liverpool for 125 a piece and you pay 0 for the other 15 games.

So, I will pose the question already asked. How much cheaper so you want it.

[bickster]

And, finally, I assume you could do what people in the states do with season tickets. Scalp the tickets to United, Chelsea, Arsenal, and Liverpool for 125 a piece and you pay 0 for the other 15 games.

Illegal in uk and due to hooliganism is a very risky strategy

[Rugeley Villa]

a stadium has to look good from every angle? :-)

a unfortunately, villa park doesnt, it actually quite an ugly stadium

It looks ugly if you're focusing purely on the North Stand, other than that it's a really great looking stadium!

meh. the witton lane and north stand look shit IMO

although the witton lane stand ay an eyesore like the north stand it is quite bland looking but like I said its ok

[Rugeley Villa]

P.s that said though I still think villa park is one of the best grounds in britain easily,

[Daniel1Avfc]

 

 

No point redeveloping villa park especially to increase capacity. Its too big for us as it is!

51,000 capacity Villa Park stadium could be sold out easily, with ticket price reductions.

This is such a BS line of thought. You can get a season ticket in the lower Holte for 500, about 26 a match, and you can pay in 9 month interest free installments. I pay more in the US in special subscriptions to my satellite company and fox soccer to see Villa on a screen.

If 500 is too rich for your blood, they have special value seats for 325, or 17 a match.

And, finally, I assume you could do what people in the states do with season tickets. Scalp the tickets to United, Chelsea, Arsenal, and Liverpool for 125 a piece and you pay 0 for the other 15 games.

So, I will pose the question already asked. How much cheaper so you want it.

 

Yes 500 is a fking rip off, not to mention the shit football villa have been playing the past few years. 

[Stevo985]

lol, i am abit (vacuumed the lounge about a douzen times yesderday) but surely cemitry (sp?) is most important to an international (lol) football stadium?

symmetry

[AVFCAM]

I think people are forgetting we already have cheaper prices than most of the league.

This German model of charging £90 a year for a season ticket is something I would love to happen, especially as my wife is not happy with my spending £500+ again this year to buy a season ticket when 85% of games are awful...but, as much as the German way makes sense, it will not happen!

Also, yes, people are right, our last 5 games were higher attendances, so were our top 6 days, but once MON left, the attendances plummeted, then fell more when Eck was in charge...even with him gone, they didn't really rocket up until we were playing well again. Football fans are fickle, we could fill 50k...when times are good, but as soon as they start looking bleak, they drop like a stone...

I acknowledge that cost is an issue for people as well, but not as much as people say...

[HolteExile]

I get the argument that you should only look to expand when you are regularly selling out.   I get it, but I disagree.

 

Once you are at the point that you are turning people away, you've lost that revenue - you don't get it back. Have the facilities in place before you get to that point.    Even if it was only the standard 4/5 games per season that seen a crowd in excess of 43,000 initially, that would boost the average attendance across the season.  Resulting in a higher average than the season before, and illustrating that there was logic behind the decision.   Our average has gone up every time we have undertaken that kind of work since 1993.

 

Naturaly an investment in bricks an mortar to that extent requires a big financial commitment up front.  Depending on success, the investment might pay for itself within 3 years/ 5 years or maybe 20 years later.   It will pay for itself in time though.

 

Hindsight being 20/20 vision, but what would have been better for our longterm future in 2007-09?  Lengthy contracts to NRC, Shorey, Sidwell, Heskey and co?   Or extending the ground?  The duration of just ONE of those contracts would have paid for the work.  Then- even if RL's time at the club was ultimately judged to be a failure, there would at least have been some sort of positive legacy. 

 

A top flight club with a 50k+  ground would be a far more attractive proposition to an investor too, when the time eventually comes to sell. Even if that club wasn't selling out at the time, the new investor can see the potential for higher revenue straight away - and doesn't have to sink funds  into ground expansion.

[TrentVilla]

I get the argument that you should only look to expand when you are regularly selling out.   I get it, but I disagree.

 

Once you are at the point that you are turning people away, you've lost that revenue - you don't get it back. Have the facilities in place before you get to that point.    Even if it was only the standard 4/5 games per season that seen a crowd in excess of 43,000 initially, that would boost the average attendance across the season.  Resulting in a higher average than the season before, and illustrating that there was logic behind the decision.   Our average has gone up every time we have undertaken that kind of work since 1993.

 

Naturaly an investment in bricks an mortar to that extent requires a big financial commitment up front.  Depending on success, the investment might pay for itself within 3 years/ 5 years or maybe 20 years later.   It will pay for itself in time though.

 

Hindsight being 20/20 vision, but what would have been better for our longterm future in 2007-09?  Lengthy contracts to NRC, Shorey, Sidwell, Heskey and co?   Or extending the ground?  The duration of just ONE of those contracts would have paid for the work.  Then- even if RL's time at the club was ultimately judged to be a failure, there would at least have been some sort of positive legacy. 

 

A top flight club with a 50k+  ground would be a far more attractive proposition to an investor too, when the time eventually comes to sell. Even if that club wasn't selling out at the time, the new investor can see the potential for higher revenue straight away - and doesn't have to sink funds  into ground expansion.

 

I agree but we are in a minority it would seem.

[HolteExile]

I must qualify that by saying I thought the time was right THEN to extend.  Even if we werent selling out every game, gates were increasing and the general feeling about the place was positive and go-ahead. 

 

Our graph is going in the opposite direction now.

[KjParton]

I think the mood is starting to once again become positive, wouldn't you? 

[HolteExile]

We *might* have stopped the rot. 

 

I'm not sure that we'll be getting close to capacity gates next year though, particularly if we sell our best player again. 

 

We seem set up for consolidation at best.  Understandable, given the past few years.   But not something that sells tickets and generates interest and positivity.  Unrecognisable from first 3 years under RL, in other words.

[The Fun Factory]

I get the argument that you should only look to expand when you are regularly selling out.   I get it, but I disagree.

 

Once you are at the point that you are turning people away, you've lost that revenue - you don't get it back. Have the facilities in place before you get to that point.    Even if it was only the standard 4/5 games per season that seen a crowd in excess of 43,000 initially, that would boost the average attendance across the season.  Resulting in a higher average than the season before, and illustrating that there was logic behind the decision.   Our average has gone up every time we have undertaken that kind of work since 1993.

 

Naturaly an investment in bricks an mortar to that extent requires a big financial commitment up front.  Depending on success, the investment might pay for itself within 3 years/ 5 years or maybe 20 years later.   It will pay for itself in time though.

 

Hindsight being 20/20 vision, but what would have been better for our longterm future in 2007-09?  Lengthy contracts to NRC, Shorey, Sidwell, Heskey and co?   Or extending the ground?  The duration of just ONE of those contracts would have paid for the work.  Then- even if RL's time at the club was ultimately judged to be a failure, there would at least have been some sort of positive legacy. 

 

A top flight club with a 50k+  ground would be a far more attractive proposition to an investor too, when the time eventually comes to sell. Even if that club wasn't selling out at the time, the new investor can see the potential for higher revenue straight away - and doesn't have to sink funds  into ground expansion.

Postive thinking- I would like to think ur right but who knows? I always think Villa should have  a bigger away allocation- if we did expand, there should be a 5-6,000 away section. The 'big' clubs would sell this out and you would get a extra 3,000 on the gate already.We are near most clubs and should encourage it as a good away day. Gets a better atmosphere, but  I would be careful in a Blues game though.   You could also 'tarp' upper sections for smaller teams (eg Fulham, Swansea etc)  to reduce the capacity. This probably won't justify building lots of new seats though!  To justify a bigger North Stand Villa probably need to have 38-40 k minimum crowds with nearly 50K potential support in the big games. Have we the support for this?

[Big_John_10]

I think the mood is starting to once again become positive, wouldn't you?

It's positive when compared to 3 consecutive relegation battles. It's positive because of how low we've dropped under Randy.

Maybe in a few years time we'll be back to that positive feeling of thinking we can challenge the big teams again.

[Troglodyte]

It's a tough one.  I'd love to see the North Stand improved, for aesthetic reasons as much as anything, but I can understand the various reasons behind it not being a priority.

 

I'm not sure how much it would cost to rebuild it to bring the capacity up to almost 50,000.  However, if the new North Stand was built as a 13,000ish seater, we'd probably sell out the extra 6,000 seats around four times per season.  We'll call it five times, to take into account a big cup game.  At £30 per ticket on average, that's still less than an extra £1m per year.  New hospitality features would probably see us make more than this, and a museum would provide a small amount of extra income, too - although it would obviously not be cheap to include in the building.  We'd have to pay extra staff but this would be roughly offset by extra revenue from catering, etc. (I presume).

 

Now, I'd like to think we'll be playing European football again before too long, but we'd still have to do well in the Europa League to fill a larger Villa Park more often.  So £1m extra income per year is probably a reasonably accurate figure.  If the new stand cost £20m to build, it would take twenty years to 'pay for itself'.

 

Then we have to take into account the possible (if, unfortunately, improbable) introduction of safe standing.  The attendances would surely increase if this were to happen, but you'd also expect this to be as a result of reducing ticket prices in these areas.  So, if Villa Park's capacity were increased to 50,000 through safe-standing areas being installed in one or more of the existing stands, this would raise further questions.  Would we still have planning permission to increase the stadium's capacity, if it were to be to above 50,000 due to standing?  And would an increase in capacity even be necessary in this scenario, or would be be able to bring in up to 60,000?