Paul Faulkner: Is He Delivering?

[paul_e]

In terms of the business and marketing side of things I think he has done a superb job of selling the Aston Villa "brand". I feel where he struggles is on the footballing side. We dont seem to have anyone on the board who has that sort experience.

It looks like he is learning fast though and is only 33 so fair play to him as its a big job.

Sorry, but I can't agree with this.  I don't see any raised awareness of the Villa 'brand' at all.

I recognise it's a difficult job and I'd agree he's done OK - but hardly superbly.

He's overseen the signing of the 3 biggest sponsorship deals we've ever had, he's got our revenue at the highest level it's ever been.

He (and Lerner) have made mistakes, letting mon push the club towards ruin and appointing the worst manager in our history being the major ones but, since MoN was told to take it easy on the money, the work to get us back on track and put us in a stronger position to reinvest has been good, that's what he's employed to do and he's done a fair job of it so far.  At the end of the summer we'll see whether that progresses from fair to excellent based on spending, if we go out and spend 25m+ then it's a clear indication that the finances are back in a very strong position, I only expect 3-4 sides in the league to spend around that level (after sales), with only man city likely to spend silly money this season.

I've tried to understand the points you're trying to make here.

The first para says he's signed the three biggest deals in the clubs history - fair enough and well done - I happen to think they reflected the higher profile of Villa under MON/Lerner's first phase, and are perhaps in line with general football inflation.  Our commercial income remains just about inline with our upper midtable standing - nothing outstanding.

I'm not sure what on earth you're saying in the second para - the only thing I might comment on is that if we spend £25m it will not be because the commercials support it, but will reflect Lerner's attitude to investing further in the club.

Completely disagree on your last point, Lerner has tried the sugar daddy approach with MoN and signed the cheques without any restrictions, it didn't work and unsustainable.  He's not going to have put the club through all this to repeat the same mistakes.  The club needs to be self sufficient, money for players (both fees and wages) will come on the basis that the club has the money, not due to Lerner throwing another fortune at it.  Any money from Lerner directly will be very carefully agreed on the basis that we can make the money back in the form of a saleable asset.

[PeterWithe]

He's overseen the signing of the 3 biggest sponsorship deals we've ever had, he's got our revenue at the highest level it's ever been.

Whilst I'm not knocking him, at least not this week, wont most of the current PL sponsorship deals for all teams represent their biggest ones ever?

[pauliewalnuts]

I think both RL and PF have been given a seriously unjust amount of stick in the recent past. On the one hand people say they should have spotted the MON largesse before it became a problem; but I don't recall too many saying at the time that it was madness spending £10m or whatever on Curtis Davies et al, just good news that we seemed to be stepping up to the plate.

In fairness, at the time we were spending insane money on Curtis Davies, we didn't realise that such spending would have left the club in dire financial straits quite so quickly.

We didn't know, but they should have.

[Ger Regan]

I think both RL and PF have been given a seriously unjust amount of stick in the recent past. On the one hand people say they should have spotted the MON largesse before it became a problem; but I don't recall too many saying at the time that it was madness spending £10m or whatever on Curtis Davies et al, just good news that we seemed to be stepping up to the plate.

In fairness, at the time we were spending insane money on Curtis Davies, we didn't realise that such spending would have left the club in dire financial straits quite so quickly.

We didn't know, but they should have.

Was Faulkner even at the club at that stage? My understanding of events was that when he came in he saw the mess re. wages, tried to act, and that's when MON walked. Am I wrong on that one?

[mr underhill]

My brother in law knows Paul in  business context and believes the guy to be very astute commercially, but is just as convinced  you can contain his football knowledge on the bell end of a gnat's cock.

[Archie]

He only failed with Mc Leish, but only who doesn't work doesn't fail, as we say in Italy. He is a very prepared but in the same time nice, humble guy, 100% committed to the club and I never understood all the anger that there was against him. Happy to see that he has been rehabilitated now.

[woody4866]

I know hind sight is a wonderful thing but we should have kept Steve Stride on
I know he would have loved to have stayed on when RL took over and with his footballing knowledge and working at Villa since an early age - he would have been a safe pair of hands (TSM would not have darkened our doorstep)
That said PF is now getting on with things and it would appear we are heading in the right direction - he has had a steep learning curve which could have cost us dearly
Onwards and upwards

[pauliewalnuts]

I think both RL and PF have been given a seriously unjust amount of stick in the recent past. On the one hand people say they should have spotted the MON largesse before it became a problem; but I don't recall too many saying at the time that it was madness spending £10m or whatever on Curtis Davies et al, just good news that we seemed to be stepping up to the plate.

In fairness, at the time we were spending insane money on Curtis Davies, we didn't realise that such spending would have left the club in dire financial straits quite so quickly.

We didn't know, but they should have.

Was Faulkner even at the club at that stage? My understanding of events was that when he came in he saw the mess re. wages, tried to act, and that's when MON walked. Am I wrong on that one?

I dont know, I doubt it, am really referring to Randy / the management

[Somniloquism]

Was Faulkner even at the club at that stage? My understanding of events was that when he came in he saw the mess re. wages, tried to act, and that's when MON walked. Am I wrong on that one?

He was Chief Operating Officer (whatever that was) for two years before becoming Chief Exec a few months before MON walked. I would suggest he was only on the business side beforehand anyway.

[olaftab]

He has messed up twice on big decisions . This has cost the business he is responsible for lot of money in compensation and loss of revenue. He really should have fallen on his sword and left along with McLeish. I have very little confidence in him.
And oh he messed up Milner transfer as well by accepting Ireland in px rather than maximising cash into club.

[Banganappa]

But is it fair to expect the executive to 2nd guess the manager? The world and his wife thought MoN could do no wrong, and at that point in time, there was no difference between an Ashley Young buy and a Curtis Davies buy. It's only with hindsight that we know the difference -  so surely it's unfair to expect the people who's job it is to appoint someone who is a genuine football professional (i.e. the manager) and do the job without interference then criticise for leaving the professionals to it. I think we can legitimately praise or criticize for branding/sponsorship/facilities issues but the malaise at AVFC to my mind has been all playing side related.

[Risso]

I know hind sight is a wonderful thing but we should have kept Steve Stride on
I know he would have loved to have stayed on when RL took over and with his footballing knowledge and working at Villa since an early age - he would have been a safe pair of hands (TSM would not have darkened our doorstep)
That said PF is now getting on with things and it would appear we are heading in the right direction - he has had a steep learning curve which could have cost us dearly
Onwards and upwards

The Steve Stride thing really is getting to be a bit boring now.  Steve was a good administrator, one of the best even.  But the problem wasn't one of administration, it was the fundamental relationship balance between Lerner and O'Neill that was all wrong.  O'Neill was given carte  blanche to spend what he liked, so even after blowing the best part of £20m on Davies and Cuellar, he then went and replaced them a year later with Collins and Dunne, as just one example.  Even if Stride had questioned the wisdom of giving a 31 year old non-scoring Heskey £65K a week for 3 years, it would have come down to Lerner either backing O'Neill or not.

What was needed was a coherent plan between Lerner and O'Neill, and it just wasn't there.  Steve Stride wouldn't have made a blind bit of difference in my opinion.

[dave.woodhall]

Reading about both PF and other CEOs it seems their main role is Chief Scapegoat. The bad things are their fault and the good ones are down to the manager.

Plan A - throw money at it and tie up as a junior partner with IMG and Nike in the hope that their glamour rubs off - failed. Plan B - spend within our means and be a large fish in a smaller corporate pool - is about to begin. If it works Randy and Paul will be heralded as the model way to run a medium-to-large club.

[Banganappa]

Reading about both PF and other CEOs it seems their main role is Chief Scapegoat. The bad things are their fault and the good ones are down to the manager.

Plan A - throw money at it and tie up as a junior partner with IMG and Nike in the hope that their glamour rubs off - failed. Plan B - spend within our means and be a large fish in a smaller corporate pool - is about to begin. If it works Randy and Paul will be heralded as the model way to run a medium-to-large club.

Spot on, couldn't agree more.

[adrenachrome]

I thought this was going to be a thread about the chubby cheeked chappy resigning and getting a paper round.

Also wassa presser when it is at home?