Aston Villa Football Club Officially Opens Flagship Store at Bullring Shopping Centre

BIRMINGHAM, England--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Aston Villa Football Club today officially opened its landmark retail store in Birmingham's iconic Bullring shopping centre. This moment marks a bold step forward in the club's continued commercial growth and ambition to position itself as a world-class organisation both on and off the pitch.
The new 10,000-square-foot, two-floor retail space is now welcoming avid fans and shoppers alike. Celebrating the occasion with the launch of the 2025/26 away kit, there was a series of prize draws offering fans the chance to win personal shopping sessions and exclusive merchandise. Shoppers were also greeted with a vibrant atmosphere including a live DJ and immersive photo opportunities.
Located next to Selfridges and alongside some of the UK's most recognisable brands, the Aston Villa Bullring store showcases the full breadth of the club's retail offering. This includes the newly revealed away kit, the full adidas x AVFC collection, training wear, lifestyle apparel, limited-edition releases, and an expansive range of adidas performance and Originals items. The opening also marks the debut of the 'Aston Works' customisation hub, where fans can personalise their purchases with bespoke designs.
'Today's opening marks a major milestone in our retail journey and broader growth strategy,' David Asquith, Vice President of Retail at Aston Villa, said. 'We've worked hard to create a space that is immersive and aspirational, going far beyond traditional retail to proudly reflect the culture and history of Aston Villa.'
'This store brings Aston Villa into the heart of Birmingham city centre in a bold and exciting way. It underlines our commitment to innovation, commercial excellence, and delivering memorable experiences for our fans. We're thrilled and can't wait to welcome more supporters to the Bullring store over the coming months and years to come.'
Paul O'Brien, Director of Leasing & Commercialisation at Hammerson, commented: 'The opening of Aston Villa's store is an important milestone and an exciting addition for Bullring, acting as a prime example of Hammerson's dedication to quality brands and experiences at our best-in-class spaces. This flagship opening demonstrates our successful strategy of creating the right spaces for local and global brands alike, helping them reach a vast catchment while further enhancing Bullring's position as one of the UK's leading prime retail and leisure destinations.'
The Bullring store is set to become a central hub for the Claret and Blue faithful, as well as a destination for Birmingham's wider community. With an integrated museum section designed to reflect the club's 150-year heritage, immersive fan experiences are combined with a best-in-class retail offering, bringing a new dynamic space with the spirit of Villa Park to the heart of the city.
The store's opening follows a week of anticipated events including a VIP preview with adidas guests and exclusive first-look content across AVFC channels. Further in-store activations will continue from 23–25 May.
Aston Villa is committed to fostering a workplace rooted in equality and diversity, and the Bullring store will reflect these values by providing an inclusive, welcoming environment for every staff member and visitor.
About Aston Villa Football Club
Founded in 1874, Aston Villa Football Club is a founding member of the Football League and a leading institution in the English game. One of only five English clubs to have been crowned champions of Europe, the team has historically enjoyed exceptional success domestically, including seven First Division Championships, seven FA Cup titles, and five Football League Cups.
A club of the future, AVFC is committed to innovating technologically, on and off the pitch, providing best in-class experience for fans and leading the football industry for best practice. United behind the club values of Pride, Passion and Purpose, Aston Villa Football Club continually thrives to push the boundaries of what a football club should be.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

New York Times

2 hours ago

• New York Times

Will PSR always lead to the transfer merry-go-round we have seen over the past year?

As the clock ticked onward and football's pseudo-transfer deadline approached, Aston Villa executives were worried. It was late June last year and, needing a deal before their accounting period ended to stave off fears of a rules breach, the man they were resting their hopes on was over 5,000 miles away with a contract to sign. Advertisement Douglas Luiz, playing in the United States for Brazil in the Copa America, did eventually join Juventus in time for Villa to record the profit on the sale within their 2023-24 books. In turn, they managed to comply with the Premier League's profit and sustainability rules (PSR) last season; they would have failed without that sale. A year on, as The Athletic detailed recently, Villa approach the end of June in a similar state of regulatory concern. It is widely expected they will need to sell again before this month is out; it might be the only way they can bring losses under the level permitted by Premier League rules. Last year's worries about Douglas Luiz signing for Juventus in time only tell half the tale. As part of the deal — or rather, as two separate deals that looked conspicuously linked — Samuel Iling-Junior and Enzo Barrenechea moved to Birmingham from Turin. Villa received £42million ($56.5m) from Juventus for Douglas Luiz, much of it booked as immediate profit in 2023-24. They spent £18.3m on Iling-Junior and Barrenechea, deals which would hit the books in future years, including the 2024-25 financial period currently nearing an end. Such circuitous transactions became a theme this time last year. Villa engaged in a similar not-quite-a-swap deal with Everton, trading Tim Iroegbunam to Merseyside with Lewis Dobbin coming the other way. Villa banked £9m on Iroegbunam, Everton got £10m for Dobbin. Three other clubs joined that particular fray. Chelsea also traded with Villa, sending Ian Maatsen up the M40 for £37.5m, as Omari Kellyman moved south for £19m. Elsewhere, Elliot Anderson and Odysseas Vlachodimos passed one another on respective journeys between Newcastle United and Nottingham Forest. Anderson has become an integral part of Nuno Espírito Santo's Forest side; Vlachodimos 'cost' Newcastle £22.8m in all and has played just 45 minutes in the Carabao Cup since. Advertisement A year on, the need for a repeat of such deals looks lower. Villa might remain in trouble but most of their peers have no need to scramble around before we reach July. To that end, the merry-go-round feel of modern football has subsided a little. Even so, last year's events have helped raise a broader question: do the current rules mean clubs will always be left having to sell players to comply, even if they do not want to? The season before last was a bumper year for player profits in England's top division. Across the 20 Premier League teams, profits on selling players topped £1billion for the first time, with the £1.119bn generated in 2023-24 over £400m higher than a year earlier. Save for a Covid-related dip in 2020-21, combined player profits have increased in each of the past six seasons. That is indicative of a wider trend in football, whereby clubs have increasingly turned to player trading as an extra revenue source. It is a phenomenon far from exclusive to the Premier League. Yet last year's huge rise also reflects clubs trying ever harder to comply with financial rules. Of the six clubs with the largest improvements in player profits between 2022-23 and 2023-24, four of them partook in those swap-like deals. Linked to those deals is another occurrence which has reared its head more frequently in recent years, again with financial compliance often cited: the sale of youth players. The logic behind the strategy is simple. Excluding any agent fees incurred on contract renewals, players developed in academies have zero accounting value in their club's books because they cost nothing to buy. To that end, selling them is a profit-maximisation exercise. Where surpluses on other players arrive only once their existing book value has been subtracted, for those who have been at a club from a young age there is little or nothing to subtract. Hence: 'pure profit'. Advertisement In the age of PSR, selling academy stars has unique appeal. Linking all such sales to rule compliance would be silly, but there have been clear examples of clubs turning that way in order to avoid a PSR breach. Indeed, when Chelsea were in the process of selling academy graduate Conor Gallagher last year, head coach Enzo Maresca claimed: 'The clubs are compelled to sell players because of the rules… if we want to promote academy players — yes, change the rule.' Chelsea have found other ways to comply, so how much they were forced to sell the likes of Gallagher by the rules rather than their own previous choices in the transfer market is open to debate. But they are not an isolated example. In the instance of Anderson, few on Tyneside were happy to see the boyhood Newcastle fan go, but from a PSR and accounting perspective it made sense. His level of performance since joining Forest speaks to how his former club would much rather have kept him. Across the board, there is a perception clubs are having to get rid of players they do not wish to — or, in the case of at least one of those swap-like deals, buy players they are not too fussed about — as the only way of meeting financial rules, rules which would seem at odds with prioritising sporting decisions. Through those not-quite-swap-deals, the loss of academy stars and the simple selling of players they would rather keep hold of, there is a growing view that PSR is forcing clubs into actions the rules never originally intended. On an otherwise comfortably mild day in Westminster, Richard Scudamore was getting, if not a grilling, then at least some pointed questioning. With the riches of a bumper new TV deal for the Premier League on the horizon, Scudamore, then the Premier League's chief executive, was taking questions from a parliamentary select committee. Perhaps the most trenchant query came from John Whittingdale, MP for Maldon and East Chelmsford, and chair of the Culture, Media and Sport select committee. 'Is there any reason,' Whittingdale asked Scudamore, 'to believe that (the increased TV) money is not going to go, as it always has before, on astronomic salaries for a small number of players and transfer payments?' Advertisement That day in July 2012 was, if not the genesis of the PSR rules now in place in the Premier League, certainly one which ensured enhanced financial regulation would take root in English football. European football's governing body UEFA had announced the introduction of 'financial fair play' rules two years prior and, on the back of Portsmouth becoming the first (and so far only) Premier League club to enter administration while a part of the top tier, the incumbent government was concerned about how English football was being run. In response to Whittingdale, Scudamore replied the league was 'forming working groups' to discuss the issue, with a view to putting 'proposals in front of clubs probably in February, March next year'. Sure enough, by early February 2013 the 20 Premier League clubs had agreed upon a 'system of enhanced financial regulations'. The nub of the system agreed 12 years ago remains in place today. A light-touch effort to restrain wage growth, termed the 'short-term cost control measure', fell by the wayside ahead of the 2020-21 season, but the headline rule limiting clubs to a maximum of £105m in losses over a three-year cycle remains very much the order of the day. How exactly that level of allowable loss was arrived at remains unclear. The general view of the time was UEFA's own maximum loss limit of €45m (£38.5m, $51.9m) over three years (which was then planned to be reduced to €30m after two seasons) was too low and would solidify the 'Big Six', making it impossible for the Premier League's supposedly smaller clubs to compete. PSR losses of $105m — i.e. after 'good' costs on infrastructure, youth and community development and women's teams had been added back — was settled upon, though clubs would be limited to just £15m over three years if their owners did not provide 'secure funding' for any loss above that figure. It might seem quaint to think now but for most of the time PSR has been in place, clubs have had few compliance worries. The rules were introduced ahead of the 2013-14 season but clubs were not first assessed until 2015-16, that being the first year in which the league could pore over three years of figures. Pre-tax results are not synonymous with a club's PSR profit or loss, the latter usually being more positive because of those 'good' costs clubs can deduct, but even just considering pre-tax figures shows a stark shift in recent years. In the first four years of assessment, only one club exceeded £105m in rolling three-year losses. That was Aston Villa in 2015-16, and their £112.5m loss over the previous three seasons was sufficiently low that, after deductions, they easily came in under the maximum loss limit. Driven by an even bigger new TV deal in 2016, and with some financial constraints now in place, the Premier League as a whole was wildly profitable for a brief spell. In two seasons between 2016 and 2018 the league's clubs posted combined pre-tax profits of £1.036bn. Results were so positive that even when the pandemic arrived in 2020, only two clubs' rolling three-year loss exceeded £105m. Advertisement The Premier League waived PSR assessments that year, and allowed clubs to average losses across 2019-20 and 2020-21 in order to account for the impact Covid had on finances. Yet even that saw losses balloon; half of the division's pre-tax losses to the end of 2020-21 exceeded £105m over the assessment period, even after that averaging. Since then, over the past three seasons for which we have figures, 31 out of 60 clubs have generated pre-tax losses of greater than £105m across their respective PSR cycles. It is for that reason PSR has become so prominent. Where in the first half-decade of its presence clubs were routinely not touching the upper loss limit, now around half the league exceeds it before any deductions are taken into account. Plainly, the number then breaching after deductions remains pretty low — but it is quite clear clubs are having to find more ways to come in under the limit than previously. One of the key elements of the government's quizzing of Scudamore in 2012 was the continued growth of player wages. Initially, the new rules seemed to have the effect of stemming such growth. From 2012-13 to the season after, the first year where clubs needed to consider PSR restraints, combined wages as a percentage of turnover dropped dramatically, from 69.6 per cent to 58 per cent. What followed was indicative of a division not really departing from its past. Premier League wages to turnover did drop as low as 54.7 per cent in 2016-17, but that was the first year of a new TV deal, where revenue zoomed ahead before wages could catch up. Across the decade, club wages have steadily climbed, even as incomes fell during the pandemic and took time to recover. Obviously, the pandemic waylaid finances in a manner no one expected, but even in this post-Covid period the share of money spent on staff costs is higher than when PSR was first introduced. In 2022-23, Premier League clubs spent more than £4bn on wages, or 66.7 per cent of their collective revenues. Interestingly, staff costs stagnated last year, reducing wages to turnover to 63.8 per cent. Yet that still means Premier League clubs were spending around six per cent more of their turnover on wages in 2024 than in 2014. Correspondingly, losses have increased, and more clubs are at risk of breaching PSR limits. To combat those increased losses, and to do so quickly, clubs have a slim arsenal of weapons. It is why selling players has become the primary choice. Profits on sales are recognised at the point of sale. More traditional revenues have to be recognised over longer periods; for example, income from a new sponsor is recorded over the span of the commercial contract, rather than simply upon agreeing the deal. Advertisement Shifting a player at the end of June and recognising an immediate benefit is possible, whereas suddenly banking a huge slug of income — the ongoing FIFA Club World Cup notwithstanding — is rather harder to manufacture. Clubs have, perhaps naturally, linked their one avenue of recourse to the existing rules framework. As Maresca outlined last August, there is a feeling the rules leave them with no option but to sell players. That is certainly true by the time they get to their accounting deadlines, but it rather ignores how those losses built up in the first place. Had clubs displayed better cost control over the years, principally around player wages and transfer fees (which have themselves blown up over the past decade), they would likely not be in the position of having to reduce losses through selling players they would rather keep. The argument often put forward when wage constraints are mentioned is that it will put English clubs at a competitive disadvantage abroad. It is a bit of a flimsy one when you consider hardly any European clubs can afford to spend as much as English clubs do. In 2023-24, six of the 10 highest wage payers in Europe were from England, with only Paris Saint-Germain, Real Madrid, Barcelona (who you suspect would welcome an end to the wages arms race) and Bayern Munich interrupting proceedings. Of the top 20, nine clubs were English. A separate view is that PSR rules are now outdated. After all, the £105m upper loss limit introduced in 2013 has not budged since, despite the costs of buying and employing players skyrocketing. The logic employed here is a higher loss limit is only right, to bring rules into line with a much-changed financial landscape. Various commentators have suggested as much, and Aston Villa actually proposed a £30m rise in the loss limit at a Premier League meeting last year. It was not voted through, despite the feeling in some quarters that clubs should be allowed to lose more money because the twin costs of wages and transfer fees have increased far beyond where they sat in 2013. Advertisement Yet that rather ignores the fact inflation has occurred on the income side too. Premier League revenues have increased by 95 per cent between 2013-14 and 2023-24, with a further rise imminent. This coming season marks the first year of a new broadcast rights cycle in which TV income has once again soared to new heights, with the 2025-28 cycle generating an estimated 17 per cent more than 2022-25. Based on past evidence, there is little to suggest clubs would not simply push themselves right up against the upper limit, wherever it may fall. All of this also ignores the fact even allowing clubs to lose an 'acceptable' amount of money in the first place rather stands at odds with the very notion of 'profit and sustainability'. One area where clubs and proponents of a higher loss limit might have better supporting evidence is in how it is costing more and more to run a football club, or any business. The UK has experienced high inflation in recent years, so general running costs have increased. Indeed, when explaining the logic behind the proposed rise to The Telegraph, Villa's then-president of business operations, Chris Heck, said, 'When something doesn't evolve in 11 years and with the cost of living alone, you scratch your head." Clubs are largely left with little way to combat such rises, save for making unpopular decisions like raising ticket prices and shifting the costs onto fans. The ongoing transfer merry-go-round can, you could argue, be directly linked to wider inflation. Between the first season when clubs had to consider PSR rules in 2013 and the end of the decade, 'other' expenses hovered around 20 per cent of revenues. The proportion tumbled as grounds were shuttered during the pandemic, but has leapt since, reflective of the wider economic environment. Such costs comprised a shade under a quarter of club revenues last year. There is an argument to make that loss limits should be adjusted in line with those costs, but to suggest they are the primary driver of increased losses overall looks a limited reading of things. Those other expenses as a proportion of turnover went from 19.6 per cent to 24.3 per cent between 2014 and 2024, a rise of 4.7 per cent. That is still less than the rise in wages as a proportion of turnover (5.8 per cent), and well below the 10.5 per cent difference seen in transfer fee amortisation costs, which have grown from 16.9 per cent of revenues to 27.4 per cent across the same period. The status quo will remain for at least another year. A mooted shift to mirroring UEFA's updated financial rules, namely a 'squad-cost ratio' that seeks to limit football-related spending, is still to be agreed upon, so the Premier League's existing PSR rules will operate across 2025-26. A 'shadow' squad-cost regime will remain in the background, without fear of non-compliance. Advertisement The likelihood is the Premier League's PSR rules will change, and it is probable they will do so in a way that shifts clubs away from having to sell players as a primary tool in the fight to comply. UEFA's squad-cost rule is assessed annually and, while player profits are included in the calculation, they are taken over the past three seasons and pro-rated to 12 months, lessening the impact of big, one-off sales. What's more, UEFA looks askance at clubs engaging in swap-like deals, further limiting the appeal of selling to comply. When PSR was introduced in England over a decade ago, it was unlikely the rules' framers intended the events of recent years. Left up against their loss limits, an increasing number of clubs have turned to selling players, even if there is no sporting desire to do so. To that end, it is easy to argue PSR will always encourage the horse-trading we are becoming increasingly accustomed to. Yet to blame the rules on their own is short-sighted. Premier League clubs over the past 12 years have enjoyed greater riches than ever before yet continue to lose huge sums, principally because of their refusal to reduce spending on player wages and transfers. Last year's wage stagnation might actually be evidence of PSR rules, and what happens when you break them, having the effect of constraining wage growth, though time will tell. The rules, based as they are on limiting losses, encourage player sales for those in fear of a breach. But a deeper issue lies in how clubs arrived at that point in the first place. (Top photos: Getty Images)

Yahoo

14 hours ago

• Yahoo

Anthony Edwards, Adidas are releasing new football cleats

The post Anthony Edwards, Adidas are releasing new football cleats appeared first on ClutchPoints. Prior to his arrival as the NBA's next rising superstar, Timberwolves' Anthony Edwards also had dreams of making highlight-reel plays on the gridiron. Being a standout football player from a young age, it comes as no surprise that Anthony Edwards could manage becoming a dual-sport athlete, but given his massive success in The Association, he'll have to keep dreaming about a life out on the field. This upcoming season, Edwards and Adidas will partner for an upcoming signature football cleat. Advertisement Check our Sneakers news for more upcoming releases and breaking content! During the NFL season, we saw a huge uptick in the trend of players wearing customized sneakers-turned-cleats during their games on Sundays. Eagles' Jalen Hurts was consistently rocking the newest Air Jordan footwear on the field, while players like Stefon Diggs and Tyreek Hill continued to show out with their custom creations. Minnesota Vikings' receiver Jordan Addison was actually the first player to bust out a custom pair of Adidas AE 1 cleats as an homage to his fellow Minnesota star Anthony Edwards. The shoes seamlessly made the transition to the football field and now, Adidas has plans to release the cleats to the public. Adidas AE 1 Football Cleats After building a reputation as 2024's hottest basketball sneaker of the year, the shoes eventually made their debut in other sports like baseball and football. This upcoming football cleat will use the Adidas AE 1 'Stormtrooper' as a base for the upper, complete with Adidas Football cleat technology along the outsoles. Advertisement We see a neon green Adidas logo along the back heel, true to the original sneaker release. The shoes will continue to feature a mesh boot underneath the molded TPU upper, so wearers should be getting all the performance capabilities on the field as they would have on the basketball court. The cleats will be done in the same TPU material and offer a seamless transition from the upper down to the outsole. The Adidas AE 1 football cleats are expected to debut June 2026 and will come with at a retail tag that is still to be determined. Expect the shoes to become available on Adidas as well as Adidas Football retailers all over the country. What do you think of the Adidas AE 1 as a football cleat? Related: Nike Air Tech Challenge II returning June 2025 Related: Air Jordan 12 'French Blue' release update

Forbes

16 hours ago

• Forbes

Golf Gives Gareth Bale A New Sport To Try To Master

Gareth Bale putts during the first round of the Sunningdale Foursomes at Sunningdale Golf Club in ... More England. To say Gareth Bale's tenure at Real Madrid was polarizing is an understatement. From 2013-22, Bale dazzled on the field by scoring 106 goals across all competitions—two more than Ronaldo—and his bicycle kick against Liverpool in the 2018 UEFA Champions League Final is heralded as one of the best goals in Champions League Final history. Bale also won 15 trophies while playing in the Spanish capital—more than double Zinedine Zidane's tally of six as a Madrid player. Despite achieving the success and accolades most players could only dream of, the Welshman still faced criticism. Some questioned why he didn't speak Spanish publicly, though Bale has since come out saying he didn't want to 'have this big fuss around me.' Others even questioned his priorities and commitment to the club. Former Real Madrid sporting director Pedja Mijatovic claimed on the radio that despite not speaking to Bale, the impression he got was that the player's priorities were allegedly: 'Wales, golf and Madrid—in that order.' While soccer remained his passion and priority until he retired in January 2023, Bale was introduced to another competitive outlet during his time at Tottenham Hotspur when he was about 20 years old: golf. 'You're playing football all the time, so it's nice to kind of mix it up,' Bale said recently from adidas global headquarters in Herzogenaurach, Germany. 'It's difficult to play other sports, so if you're playing tennis or another sport where it requires a lot of movement, it can really tire you out, but in golf you can get around it in a cart where you're getting in and out hitting golf shots and it's not massively strenuous. 'Once you start to hit a couple of cleaner shots, it kind of really sucks you in and gets you addicted.' After starring for Southampton as a teenager, Bale signed a four-year deal with Tottenham in 2007. Playing with teammates mainly during the offseason or on the rare off day from training, golf gave Bale another competitive outlet without the physical demands—and risks—that came with professional soccer. 'Basically as soon as I started playing, that natural competitive instinct of trying to get better went in straight away,' said Bale, a five-time UEFA Champions League winner. 'And you just want to keep improving—playing better, shooting better scores, not losing so many balls. It was that natural progression.' As his soccer career progressed, including a brief loan spell with Spurs as well as a 13 appearances with LAFC, Bale's golf obsession continued to blossom in the background as he helped his national team qualify for the 2022 FIFA World Cup for the first time in 64 years. (Celebrating with a Welsh flag with 'Wales. Golf. Madrid. In that order.' written on it certainly didn't win over any Madridistas.) Bale's backyard of his Welsh estate is a golfer's paradise with replica holes of TPC Sawgrass' Island Green, Augusta National's Golden Bell and Royal Troon's Postage Stamp. He's played in Pro-Ams and charity competitions as he continues to lower his handicap, which was at 0.1 as of February. He was quick to point out he wasn't officially scratch (0.0) yet, meaning shooting par or better on a regular basis. Bale also continues to work with adidas as he transitions from the soccer field to the fairway. Rather than sharing feedback on optimizing soccer cleats to give him a competitive advantage as he speeds by defenders, Bale is now providing feedback on adidas golf shoes and apparel. 'I always say in football it was so important to me as I got faster and more powerful, I needed a boot that could withstand the amount of weight I was putting on it so my foot wouldn't move and I was able to react quickly,' he said. 'It's having that same kind of stability through the foot where you can go after a drive knowing where you push off the ground, your foot's not really going to slip inside the shoe and also having the traction on the bottom so you stay on the grass. 'I think it's so important to have the confidence in your footwear that you're able to not really have to think about it so you can concentrate on the more important aspects of your game which is trying to hit the ball straight.' Recently linked to a U.S.-based private equity company eyeing a potential takeover of Plymouth Argyle, whether or not Bale gets into club ownership is still to be determined, but his pursuit of perfection on the course remains. 'I knew I wasn't going to master it quite like I did football,' Bale said. 'It was something I really enjoyed doing and, most importantly, was able to do (during my playing career).'