Are we a selling club? Or are we a buying club? And does it matter?

[sonlyme]

Risso - I understand now - you honestly think Randy Lerner doesn't know what he is doing - fair enough mate - but I can't agree with you.   Cheers.

Dante - bless you.

Do you think the Divine Comedy could fit one more circle into the descent into hell?  Football message boards perhaps?

Perhaps every online forum could carry the header - "'Abandon all hope, all ye who enter here.'" 

Scratch that - they'd get sued -  Carson Yeung has copyrighted said phrase for St Andrew's.

UTV

[Villa'Zawg]

Just one (very long) excuse for Randy giving O'Neill far more money to spend on rubbish players than he should have

There is a fair bet that Randy is regretting this now, but that post was more about how we move forward isn't it?

we spent an average of £20m a season during Randy's first 4 seasons. We've recouped 75% of that with sale of the 3 most expensive players bought during that period. He hasn't got much to complain about in relation to transfer fees invested in the squad.

[sonlyme]

Hello Dawg

Love the signature - "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts."

How do you arrive at those figures?   £80 000 000 out and  £60 000 000 in - for a net spend of £20million.

I can find no source that concurs.

For a good read on Villa finances try this... http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2011/mar/01/aston-villa-randy-lerner-accounts

Or this... http://swissramble.blogspot.com/search/label/Aston%20Villa

A tad out of date but Swiss Ramble remains one of the most interesting sites on football finance the web has to offer.

I'm not seeking to argue with you - I just think there is a lot of misinformation circling our club, and I agree with you - arguments based on facts and figures are the only way we can move forward as a fanbase - otherwise it's all opinion only - and tends to go round and round.

Maybe one of the more reliable mods could sticky and lock a verified facts and figures thread?   This could cut down on a lot of the crossed wires and heat that builds up in these discussions.

What has become clear is that some people still regard Mr L as suspect.  A bit dodgy.   I find that hard to understand myself.  Maybe I'm missing something.

UTV.

[Legion]

Sorry, we have no reliable mods on here. Anyway there are rather a lot of stickies at the moment.

[Dante Lavelli]

The swissramble is a great blog (if long). He uses a number of examples from abroad saying that the best clubs (who do not have massive fanbases) continually sell their best player and grow from that income. Lyon and Porto are two example that he writes about in detail iirc.

The problem with Villa at the moment is that they haven't reinvested the money.

[Villa'Zawg]

Hello Dawg

Love the signature - "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts."

How do you arrive at those figures?   £80 000 000 out and  £60 000 000 in - for a net spend of £20million.

I can find no source that concurs.

For a good read on Villa finances try this... http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2011/mar/01/aston-villa-randy-lerner-accounts

Or this... http://swissramble.blogspot.com/search/label/Aston%20Villa

A tad out of date but Swiss Ramble remains one of the most interesting sites on football finance the web has to offer.

I'm not seeking to argue with you - I just think there is a lot of misinformation circling our club, and I agree with you - arguments based on facts and figures are the only way we can move forward as a fanbase - otherwise it's all opinion only - and tends to go round and round.

Maybe one of the more reliable mods could sticky and lock a verified facts and figures thread?   This could cut down on a lot of the crossed wires and heat that builds up in these discussions.

What has become clear is that some people still regard Mr L as suspect.  A bit dodgy.   I find that hard to understand myself.  Maybe I'm missing something.

UTV.

I arrived at the £80m figure by adding up the published transfer fees for players we bought and sold.

I agree that Swiss Ramble is an excellent blogger and very knowledgeable. That article (Apr 2010) estimates our net transfer spend at "around £85m" (I think the Gardner sale was not included in his figures), so he more or less agrees on the net spend figure. As you know, we've since sold Milner (£26m), Young(£17m) and Downing(£20m) for a total of £63m or approx.

That doesn't equate to a net spend of £20m (I wasn't suggesting it did) as it doesn't account for Ireland (£8m), Bent(£18m), Makoun(£5m) and Given(£3m). The net transfer spend since he took over currently stands at approx. £50m if you add in the Shorey, Sidwell and Davies sales, which is nothing special for a club with revenues of £90m per year, the 20th highest in Europe.

I don't think Lerner is dodgy. He's a businessman and he's a businessman who has placed £100m of debt on the clubs books and charged the club £12.2m in one years management fees and interest payments.

[Mister E]

... in preparation for a sale of the club to recoup his investment at some point in time not too distant from now, be it six months or two years.

I think that's a misjudgement of RAL's objectives, albeit I have only my opinion to back that (as you have yours). I think that RAL is gambling on the gradual re-balancing of the European football market for player-prices and salaries, partially as a result of FFD and partially because of Platini's perceived strong UEFA leadership.
I think RAL's faith in this is a little misplaced, but nonetheless it says to me that he is indeed in for the long term. That does not mean, however, that he will be shooting for the stars - as many thought he would be doing ad infiinitum.

Whilst I'm on a roll, I think he'll back McL; either in this window or in others. I think what's holding up the transfers right now is the lack of market activity generally and a belief by McL that he has players in the squad that can do the job for next season. The current close-season tournies will shake out both McL's thinking and the current market lethargy.

[Villa'Zawg]

The swissramble is a great blog (if long). He uses a number of examples from abroad saying that the best clubs (who do not have massive fanbases) continually sell their best player and grow from that income. Lyon and Porto are two example that he writes about in detail iirc.

The problem with Villa at the moment is that they haven't reinvested the money.

Lyon and Porto are able to attract the very best youth players in their respective nations, same as Ajax. We're not in the same situation and can't rely on the same model.

[GJH]

We are neither.

We are a business.

We have signed big name players and sold them, we have signed shite players and sold them. we have improved the ground and training facilities and paid big money along the way.

We have devolped the youth team and put them on 4-5 year contracts, Delboy, Bannan, Albrighton. If they come good we can earn big transfer fees for them.

The ticket prices have increased and the TV revenues have goe through the roof.

The only way to achieve anything in this league is to spend millions and millions on BIG name players. The big names sell shirts and merchandise and attract the media to the games each week.

Deadly Doug ran it as a business and so is Lerner. O'neil probably wanted another 50-100 million worth of players to getus to the top 4 but lerner was reluctant to give him anymore money. Fair enough.

Man Utd can do it because of the revenue they bring in, Chelsea and Man City can because of the billionaire owners and Liverpool and spurs have borrowed millions to do it, relying on the champions league to pay off the loans.

Its ok spending 24m on Bent, but having to sell Youngy and Downing to fund it is the position we are in.

We are a mid to top half team who are probably up there with the best of the rest, but until we can pay 30 milliion and 100k a week for each player thats where we will stay. Nothing wrong with that.

[TheSandman]

My point is - f**k'em.  If we can't buy 'em off the shelf for 40 million - or pay them all 200k a week - f**k'em - we'll make some of our own.

More hyperbole.

Just like your "everything is shit, woe is me and we're sure to go down" back catalogue then.

[Rudy Can't Fail]

The swissramble is a great blog (if long). He uses a number of examples from abroad saying that the best clubs (who do not have massive fanbases) continually sell their best player and grow from that income. Lyon and Porto are two example that he writes about in detail iirc.

The problem with Villa at the moment is that they haven't reinvested the money.

Lyon and Porto are able to attract the very best youth players in their respective nations, same as Ajax. We're not in the same situation and can't rely on the same model.

Due to Portuguese law, Porto are able to cherry pick the best from Brazil and South America. If you want a good youth model reference, look no further than Sporting. A selling club.

[martin]

Yes. Yes. No.

Yes.