New Swiss ramble...an excellent insight into the current situation...

[russon]

"reported £2 million compensation paid to Birmingham for McLeish"

shudder

[Simba]

And how much compensation to fire him?

another shudder

[robbo1874]

The article reinforces the mainstream opinion that Randy let himself and the club down by not having football people at the club that may have kept MON in check. I must admit that when you see the figures in black and white no-one can say Randy wasn't or isn't committed to Villa it's purely his selection process for key positions that astound most of us. Houllier was in the process of doing what most of us had been crying out for and that is cheaper better overseas players, i think most of us was looking forward to see who he could bring to the club.

We should have kept him on in a DoF type role...

I'd have been reasonably happy with houllier as DoF and macallister as the manager. This is mainly due to the improvement that was made in the latter stages of last season. I think they did enough to warrant a chance if that is how the club were looking to go. Never really liked houllier or warmed to him as villa boss. But you could see what they were trying to do and that combination might have worked given time.

[Ad@m]

I don't take the figures on that blog as gospel, mind. As I'm pretty sure it's the same guy who had NRC listed as a £9.5 million purchase by us and Bent as a £25 million signing by Tottingham.

But it wouldn't surprise me at all if the wage bill has actually increased since 2010, despite the amount of high earners we've shifted.

To be fair, the guy gives the references to where he got his figures from.  Transfer fee figures are taken from a transfer website so who knows on their accuracy.

The other figures though, including the wage bill, come straight from the audited accounts so you'd hope they were pretty accurate.

[Billy Walker]

The things I notice after reading are firstly, considering the amount of money we spent, how different could things have been if we'd actually made a couple of marquee signings in 2008 instead of signing up the dross that we did. But more importantly, the game is absolutely rotten because of money and it's not going to get any better. I know we should have all learnt to accept that a long time ago but it's still desperately sad that we can't compete, even with a multi millionaire owner.

I see Arsenal are being linked with a £10.9 million move for Podalski.  That's the type of signing we could have gone for during the first few years of the MON era and I just wonder why we did not give such things a go?  There's some fantastic talent in Europe going for relative peanuts.

McLeish says there's room for one or two decent signings to complement our team of young lads, if we used some genuine nous and scoured the world for top, young talent I would be delighted and have a whole lot more hope about the future.

[Billy Walker]

There is little reason to question Randy's commitment.

Sadly, though, there is reason to question his competence as a football club owner.

Not saying that a football club owner needs to know a lot about how run a football club, but he should surround himself with people who does. Randy has favoured surrounding him with people he gets on with. That is slightly at odds with the rhetoric of him being a 'custodian' and not an owner.
Randy invested a lot in his first years. We cannot question that. But results were meagre in terms of sustained growth, trophies and reputation.

There is little doubt that we now need to tighten our belts. But I'm not sure the club is carrying out the austerity better than the initial extravaganza.

The important question is not why we don't have any money, but why the club isn't better run.

I agree. And sadly, I feel the Villa will not move forward until the issue is faced up to and addressed.

I think they got their whole initial strategy wrong in trying to concentrate on the local market as opposed to building up an overseas support base.  If Villa had really worked Asia and the US by touring and using the team-up with Nike to its full potential I think the club would be generating more revenue today. From 2007-2010 we could have made some real progress overseas.

[mikeb1982]

The things I notice after reading are firstly, considering the amount of money we spent, how different could things have been if we'd actually made a couple of marquee signings in 2008 instead of signing up the dross that we did. But more importantly, the game is absolutely rotten because of money and it's not going to get any better. I know we should have all learnt to accept that a long time ago but it's still desperately sad that we can't compete, even with a multi millionaire owner.

I see Arsenal are being linked with a £10.9 million move for Podalski.  That's the type of signing we could have gone for during the first few years of the MON era and I just wonder why we did not give such things a go?  There's some fantastic talent in Europe going for relative peanuts.

McLeish says there's room for one or two decent signings to complement our team of young lads, if we used some genuine nous and scoured the world for top, young talent I would be delighted and have a whole lot more hope about the future.

This has never been our strength though.  We usually, regardless of who's in charge, over pay for a has been or gamble on a young player that doesn't come off.  We very rarely bring in a young European player, which leads me to believe we don't have the scouting network.  Why that is the case is whole different question

[paul_e]

It's importatnt to note that player signing fees and transfer fees are spread across the length of the contract so a lot of the recent expenses are still down to signings made by MoN.  Once those players leave we'll start to see a vastly changed picture.  As I understand it the £25 investment from Randy was purely to cover the transfer fees of the players we got in the january window and our actual cash flow was pretty much break even outside those signings.  It still means that the Milner money effectively covered a shortfall (mostly the 12m of compensation paid out to various parties) but I genuinely believe those figures have been manipulated to put as bad a spin on things as possible for 2 reasons.

1: it gives Mcleish some ammo to say his hands are tied until the finances are sorted and potentially buys him time with fans.
2: with the financial fair play rules we're better off showing a big loss now so that things like transfer fees for some of the previous signings don't have such a big effect on accounts going forward (by having a dimished level of amortisation), this makes it a lot easier to meet the requirements of those rules, similar to the dodgy sponsorship deals at a few clubs, etc.

I might be totally wrong but I don't think we'll know for sure until this seasons result are published, that said I'd guess the wages are now considered to be in order so as people like heskey and dunne leave hopefully we'll have more to play with.  Use those wages sensibly to pay 3-4 players on 30k and we're looking at a potentially stronger squad without any additional outlay (other than fees, which means this is backed up by the idea of bosmans and 1-2 purchases).

[Dante Lavelli]

I'm not convinced by the logic of signing Bosman when we've struggled for so long because we paid too high wages.

Bosman's are always paid top whack as they have all the leverage (no fee etc).  If they come off then obviously it is fine but my hunch is that a Bosman is more likely to be mercenary types.  Besides if the signing does not work out, all the other players will be wanting comparable wages.

Personally, I'd prefer a squad of hungry (young) players on low wages looking to improve together.  The cream will rise to the top based on their consistent performances.  Whereas Bosman get the BIG wages before they've proved anything which I think is a dangerous and potential divisive in a team environment.

[Tokyo Sexwhale]

Yep, if you're a Bosman it's likely to be because your current club doesn't want you anymore, or you/your agent has deliberately let your contract run down so you can get a free transfer.

I'm not sure either option is the greatest.

Come to think of it, I can't recall that many fantastic Bosman signings.

[ktvillan]

Although I haven't read it all the facts and figures make very interesting reading.  If I'm reading it right, basically O'Neill was allowed to quadruple the wage bill in 4 years.  Which would have been fine had they been bums on seats signings that sold tickets and shirts, leading to a corresponding jump in turnover.  But since they were largely overpaid journeymen it was asking for trouble.

Where the guy lets himslef down is describing Houllier's reign as an umitigated disaster.  First off, finishing 9th is not a disaster, and secondly there is plenty of "mitigation" such as the shite he was left to clear up by O'Neill, a distinctly less talented squad than their cost would suggest,  selfish players undermining him,  the worst injury crisis in many a year, and heart trouble.  It was GHs sigings in January that went a long way to us avoiding the drop last season. 

[Dante Lavelli]

Newcastle released their figures today:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/mar/08/newcastle-united-losses-fall

[Doorbell]

Although I haven't read it all the facts and figures make very interesting reading.  If I'm reading it right, basically O'Neill was allowed to quadruple the wage bill in 4 years.  Which would have been fine had they been bums on seats signings that sold tickets and shirts, leading to a corresponding jump in turnover.  But since they were largely overpaid journeymen it was asking for trouble.

Where the guy lets himslef down is describing Houllier's reign as an umitigated disaster.  First off, finishing 9th is not a disaster, and secondly there is plenty of "mitigation" such as the shite he was left to clear up by O'Neill, a distinctly less talented squad than their cost would suggest,  selfish players undermining him,  the worst injury crisis in many a year, and heart trouble.  It was GHs sigings in January that went a long way to us avoiding the drop last season.

A good summation I'd say...

[Doorbell]

Newcastle released their figures today:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/mar/08/newcastle-united-losses-fall

...considering how well they're doing in the league this season you'd expect them to be well in the black by the post next years figures...

[Ad@m]

Newcastle released their figures today:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/mar/08/newcastle-united-losses-fall

Sadly that suggests Newcastle are another team we wont be able to compete with for the next few years.

I don't get it though - it seems that us sending them down the other year and expecting them to impload because of all the silly contracts they couldn't get out of actually had the opposite effect and has done them the world of good.

I wish I knew how they did it.