Heroes & Villains, the Aston Villa fanzine
Heroes & Villains => Heroes Discussion => Topic started by: Legion on August 14, 2011, 07:42:27 PM
-
Article written by Villa fan Denis_B:
We have all read a lot of things lately about what we ‘think’ is going on at Villa Park but unfortunately the wall of silence, unlike the Berlin Wall is still intact.
The B6 equivalent of Pravda has recently issued a letter to the valued Season Ticket holders wherein Randy and Paul probably well assisted by Price Waterhouse Cooper or similar have tried to deliver a smoke and mirrors communication straight out of the manual ‘How to run a Football Club and piss off the fans’ first published by Doug Ellis in 1984. But what about the 10′s of thousands of non season ticket holders around the globe, what do they count for?
We read about the Europs top 20 Financial League and how we are going to increase turnover etc etc etc….. bean counter speech all of it. As a non-season ticket holder I am not sure whether I was allowed to read it or whether I should even comment on it.
Simple things actually need answering as far as I am concerned. IF Ged Houllier had not suffered a heart attack we were led to believe he was going to rebuild the squad. Sadly that was not to be so what happened?
We managed to rid the club of 12 players in recent months, replacing them with 2.
We received about £35,000,000 for 2 alone and have spent about £13,000,000. allegedly we have repaid Randy some £15,000,000 in respect of a loan leaving us with at least £7,000,000 left BUT the manager has no money to spend. Bent and Makoun were purchased with the Milner cash in a moment of panic when things did look bad and relegation was a strong possibility.
So what would have happened if the club genuinely offered improved contracts to Ashley Young and Downing? Would that have left us well and truly impoverished and on the verge of significant financial problems?
Or is it likely the club had no intention whatsoever of keeping either of these 2 and just lied to us?
These questions have been asked of the oracle of all good in Randys world, good old Colonel Sanders, sorry General Krulak but on the odd occasion he can drag himself from his 24/7 job at some US seat of learning he manages to sidestep the issues.
The club sent out the Colonel to sell us the brand and the ideas and sow the PR seeds regarding how good Randy was for all things Claret and Blue so what has happened? A man who is supposed to be a non-executive Director, part of the Board running a multi million pound business can’t find more than a few minute a fortnight to speak to the plebs via 3 websites. How on earth can he contribute to the running of the club?
The whole thing is rapidly going pear shaped and I for one cannot see where it is going to go from here. Is he going to sell? Is he going to let things drift and hope the Arabs, Gilletts or Romans all get bored and then hope we can then challenge?
I can certainly accept we are not going to challenge seriously in the short to medium term and any ambition to do so is ridiculous so why not re-introduce yourself to the English language instead of the fluent gibberish in the letter and make some sort of address to ALL fans?
Remember Randy you are privileged to be the custodian of an old English institution, Aston Villa Football Club, the fact you do not like publicity is in all honesty too bad. You have put yourself in this position and you owe it to us the fans to come out and speak. The fact you only managed to attend about 10 games last year doesn’t bode well.
Discuss.
-
That's the thing I don't get about it all. The board have told us that improved terms were offered to Milner, Ashley and Downing - the latter two looked like signing and then stalled... Then at the end of the season both are gone pretty quickly.
What would have happened had they accepted the contracts on offer and signed?
-
nice one Leeg, have you sent it?
Is it now understood that RL is a lot less wealthy than he was or thought he was 5 years ago?
I dont think that there is much we dont know except for RL long term intention and he is hardly likely to disclose that, particularly if he wants out.
It is pretty obvious that the strategy now is to try to break even whilst maintaining a place in the PL, in fact these are mutually inclusive.
-
Some very good points. I have never felt so indifferent towards my beloved club as I do now. I watched yesterday and all I could think was " God theres another 9 months of this"
-
nice one Leeg, have you sent it?
Is it now understood that RL is a lot less wealthy than he was or thought he was 5 years ago?
I dont think that there is much we dont know except for RL long term intention and he is hardly likely to disclose that, particularly if he wants out.
It is pretty obvious that the strategy now is to try to break even whilst maintaining a place in the PL, in fact these are mutually inclusive.
Has Leeg written that? I would be surprised as referring to Gen Krulak as Col Saunders is something I wouldn't expect from him, especially as he has met him on several occasions in the Bartons.
-
I agree with a lot of it, but the Col Sanders bit is a bit too disrespectful.
-
So we still need to reduce wages, and we can't afford a loan signing unless we offload players again. Yet we offered Downing and Young improved terms? Hmmmmm.
-
Missing from the outgoings are the multi millions paid to either release or compensate Lerners managerial appointments.
That probably takes up the remainder.
My question would be simple.
How is Randy using his business accumen to increase revenue at the club ?
-
Who or what is that a "quote" from ?
-
''Col Sanders'' and ''Mr Lerner Sir''...not exactly going to win their respect taking the piss out of their names.
-
No name/piss taking.
Think we got room to spend on wages after cutting so much back.
-
Typical load of moaning bollocks you read on all sites these days.
The only way we are going to compete is to get a middle eastern sovereign wealth fund to buy the club and pump money in.
Randy is not Abramovich, get over it
-
Written by an evictee from here and published on a certain blog...
-
Typical load of moaning bollocks you read on all sites these days.
The only way we are going to compete is to get a middle eastern sovereign wealth fund to buy the club and pump money in.
Randy is not Abramovich, get over it
Maybe so, but there are still questions that need to be answered.
-
Typical load of moaning bollocks you read on all sites these days.
The only way we are going to compete is to get a middle eastern sovereign wealth fund to buy the club and pump money in.
Randy is not Abramovich, get over it
Maybe so, but there are still questions that need to be answered.
Correct, a lot of what has happened of late makes no sense.
-
Some very good points. I have never felt so indifferent towards my beloved club as I do now. I watched yesterday and all I could think was " God theres another 9 months of this"
I don't get this bit. Maybe I'm misinterpreting it but I could never feel indifferent to our club.
Indifferent to the Owner, the Board and their policies ( or what we believe are their policies), maybe but not towards our club.
If I'm misreading what you're saying, then apologies.
-
Some very good points. I have never felt so indifferent towards my beloved club as I do now. I watched yesterday and all I could think was " God theres another 9 months of this"
I don't get this bit. Maybe I'm misinterpreting it but I could never feel indifferent to our club.
Indifferent to the Owner, the Board and their policies ( or what we believe are their policies), maybe but not towards our club.
If I'm misreading what you're saying, then apologies.
i think a lot of people feel the same, thats why attendancies vary
-
Written by an evictee from here and published on a certain blog...
So people can be banned from here and moderators see fit to use their opinions to provoke response here ?
-
Some very good points. I have never felt so indifferent towards my beloved club as I do now. I watched yesterday and all I could think was " God theres another 9 months of this"
I don't get this bit. Maybe I'm misinterpreting it but I could never feel indifferent to our club.
Indifferent to the Owner, the Board and their policies ( or what we believe are their policies), maybe but not towards our club.
If I'm misreading what you're saying, then apologies.
i think a lot of people feel the same, thats why attendancies vary
Fair enough. I only get to 1 game a season. That doesn't fluctuate. Maybe if I was in a position to attend more often then I would hum and haw about attending depending on how things are going.
-
Those who use the same level of wit as David Gold should viewed with the same level of contempt.
-
I just think it is a sad state of affairs entering the season where the hottest of topics is the turnover and costs of the club. In this money dictated world of football it is a sad reflection that the relative turnover of our club versus our peers dictates our ability on the pitch.
The truth is if football is now all about business and wages are the biggest expenditure then we need to cut our cloth accordingly. It appears that some owners are now using the new UEFA rules as a means to pull the plug on spending.
Interestingly Paris St Germain and Malaga have recently had new mega wealthy owners and must be spending more than they bring in, to try and bring success on the pitch, do these fall foul of the new rules and will they be kicked out of europe should they get there?
No chance! just like Man City wont they will find a way round the rules, just like the richest tend to find ways of circumnavigating paying tax.
I back the fact we cannot expect to spend circa 85% of our turnover on wages, and to enable us to invest we must cut the wages to turnover and increase revenue into the club. This is the best way to make us viable.
I cannot help feeling though that Randy has had a change of heart, because whilst I agree that we cannot afford to put uneccesary risks on the club that could jeopardise the future. The problem I have with the new strategy is how quickly we are enacting this change without any thought to how this is going to effect the performance on the pitch, which for a football club is the bread and butter of generating income. It makes no sense to aim to be in the top 20 of the Deloitte rich list, if we do not have the revenue being generated by performances on the pitch.
For me exciting football with quality players will generate income, because if you are on TV more and receive more press exposure, then this will be better for any prospective "corporate partner".
Anyway back to the football, Given had a good game yesterday!
-
I feel quite sorry for the General in all this if I'm honest. He's been hung out to dry. It's obvious by some of his comments such as 'When has Randy not backed the manager?', 'Our ambitions have not changed' that he has been out of the loop RE goings on at B6 since he has taken his new job.
Is that £15million related to the management fees from the accounts last year or something else entirely?
-
Someone at work made an interesting comment today, which the more I think about the more I think is about right.
Villa have about as much chance of winning the league as someone like Port Vale have, but at least supporting the Vale would be more fun.
-
If you were in Randy's position (ooh er missus)
what would you do?
a-spunk a load of money away on trying to compete with manc Citie et al
b-encourage more of the likes of Bannan/Albrighton etc and wait to see what effect these financial fair play regs have?
he's had a go at -'a',seemingly got sick of looking at a very lopsided balance sheet and gone for option 'b'
and there is bugger all we can do about it
-
Someone at work made an interesting comment today, which the more I think about the more I think is about right.
Villa have about as much chance of winning the league as someone like Port Vale have, but at least supporting the Vale would be more fun.
Why is it? The last 12 months have seen their fans marching against their owner and all of the stuff that goes with that. It's the same at all clubs, even fans of the most successful team of the last 20 years get preoccupied with protests against the Glaziers.
The fun of going to games comes from your own attitude, I reckon.
-
Someone at work made an interesting comment today, which the more I think about the more I think is about right.
Villa have about as much chance of winning the league as someone like Port Vale have, but at least supporting the Vale would be more fun.
Why is it? The last 12 months have seen their fans marching against their owner and all of the stuff that goes with that. It's the same at all clubs, even fans of the most successful team of the last 20 years get preoccupied with protests against the Glaziers.
The fun of going to games comes from your own attitude, I reckon.
Or not going and still having a good old moan about what should or not be going on within the running of the club.
-
If your not a season ticket holder its expensive to go. I went to fulham yesterday, I sent a lot of money and it wasn't that entertaining. I have a feelin that this is what its going to be like! Were gonna be the new blues. Also reading that Randy now sees us a business model hardly fills me with confidence
-
Written by an evictee from here and published on a certain blog...
So people can be banned from here and moderators see fit to use their opinions to provoke response here ?
What are you going on about? It's a post I read elsewhere that I thought deserving of discussion.
-
If you were losing 20 million pounds this year *after* all the sales, what would you do? I think it is legitimate to ask questions about why tighter controls on the money were not kept early on, but my guess is that it was a real attempt to break into the CL. That did not work and so he began to rein it in during the last year of MON's reign because he did not trust him and was not getting a return on money spent. He is simply trying to reduce the wages to realistic levels. Not sure he should be blamed for it as 20 million is a great deal of money to anyone!
-
Written by an evictee from here and published on a certain blog...
So people can be banned from here and moderators see fit to use their opinions to provoke response here ?
What are you going on about? It's a post I read elsewhere that I thought deserving of discussion.
The poster in question isn't banned in any case.
-
If you were losing 20 million pounds this year *after* all the sales, what would you do? I think it is legitimate to ask questions about why tighter controls on the money were not kept early on, but my guess is that it was a real attempt to break into the CL. That did not work and so he began to rein it in during the last year of MON's reign because he did not trust him and was not getting a return on money spent. He is simply trying to reduce the wages to realistic levels. Not sure he should be blamed for it as 20 million is a great deal of money to anyone!
You have to ask how the hell did we get into this mess, the losses seem to stem from MON being given total control over players and contracts, so despite doubling revenue over the last 5 years and selling our best players we are now in austerity land. The General has been absent and we have a statement from the owner that talks about finance and finance only. Combine this with the apparent reduction in the owners net worth and you may have a clue as to why the natives appear restless.
-
If you were losing 20 million pounds this year *after* all the sales, what would you do? I think it is legitimate to ask questions about why tighter controls on the money were not kept early on, but my guess is that it was a real attempt to break into the CL. That did not work and so he began to rein it in during the last year of MON's reign because he did not trust him and was not getting a return on money spent. He is simply trying to reduce the wages to realistic levels. Not sure he should be blamed for it as 20 million is a great deal of money to anyone!
Then don't lie to people about competing to win trophies and playing in the CL. £20m or £50m doesn't even buy a Premier League team a seat at the table.
-
When they arrived here, not knowing a huge amount about the game, they had a manager in waiting, one who everyone told them (and still tells) was brilliant, and that we were lucky to have him.
Said manager - I believe - then said (in broad terms) "I'll take care of it" and became the man who handled all the stuff they didn't know about - basically, managing the lot.
If you look at it that way, it makes sense. It must have been extraordinarily convenient for them to have a "total control" manager in place when they needed to learn fast and hit the ground running.
Where the problem came was trusting him blindly (slight exaggeration, but you get my drift) for too long. By the time we found it it was a bad idea, the manager had thrown his toys out of his pram and flounced off, we had a crippling wage bill, a patchy squad, ageing players on big money, and had spent a fortune to hit a glass celing.
Alll that, I can understand, even if I don't agree with it (and I am thinking about the "blow the lot with Martin" thing primarily).
What I am far less impressed with is the way things have been handled over the last 12 months. I'd have thought that having spent such huge amounts of money, the priority when MON went would have been to ensure that we didn't throw away any of the progress we had already made.
Appointing Houllier was a thoughtful move in some ways, a very experienced continental manager, who understood the importance of things like scouting and shopping abroad. Appointing AM seems like a retrograde step, going back to MON's archaic form of football.
It is only one game, and I am not going to judge the bloke on that, but it struck me yesterday that it was like watching a MON team except without the crosses. The inevitable result of appointing a manager who has the same basic football ethos, except this time, he's got a much weaker squad and no money to spend.
I entirely understand the need to claw back some money and get the wage bill under control. However, we are doing it far too radically. I can see this squad struggling badly this season, no matter how much we don't want it to, I just can't see where the service to Bent will come from, or how we'll cope with even a few injuries.
We're firmly at risk of throwing the baby out with the bathwater if we cut back too hard, and we'll throw away what remains of the progress made in the first five years and be back where we started, except in lots of debt.
Worrying.
-
Another point Pelty, at the point that you dont trust the Manager it is time to get rid, so why did he give MON more money to waste?
-
We received about £35,000,000 for 2 alone and have spent about £13,000,000. allegedly we have repaid Randy some £15,000,000 in respect of a loan leaving us with at least £7,000,000 left BUT the manager has no money to spend. Bent and Makoun were purchased with the Milner cash in a moment of panic when things did look bad and relegation was a strong possibility.
So in an age when most mega rich owners are converting their debt in equity (in effect cancelling the money a club owes them), Randy hasn't converted ANY of his debt to equity, and is making AVFC pay him back. Is this right, and if so I guess Randy is either not as rich as we thought, or is losing interest.
-
If you were losing 20 million pounds this year *after* all the sales, what would you do? I think it is legitimate to ask questions about why tighter controls on the money were not kept early on, but my guess is that it was a real attempt to break into the CL. That did not work and so he began to rein it in during the last year of MON's reign because he did not trust him and was not getting a return on money spent. He is simply trying to reduce the wages to realistic levels. Not sure he should be blamed for it as 20 million is a great deal of money to anyone!
If we're losing £20m this year then things are clearly worse than we have been led to believe.
What happened to the list of players houlier was going to buy and the general talking about backing Mcleish which quite clearly was never going to happen. You have to admit this is misleading at best.
As far as blame who would you say is responsible for the finances of the club. Surely somebody would have been making forward projections of costs and how that looks against current revenues before making any purchases. At the end of the day surely the buck stops with Randy.
-
Maybe he thought the bespectacled genius would understand the situation we were in and pull his head in for the greater good?
-
Maybe he thought the bespectacled genius would understand the situation we were in and pull his head in for the greater good?
Whatever your opinion of the board, there's no doubt MON let them down badly.
-
We received about £35,000,000 for 2 alone and have spent about £13,000,000. allegedly we have repaid Randy some £15,000,000 in respect of a loan leaving us with at least £7,000,000 left BUT the manager has no money to spend. Bent and Makoun were purchased with the Milner cash in a moment of panic when things did look bad and relegation was a strong possibility.
So in an age when most mega rich owners are converting their debt in equity (in effect cancelling the money a club owes them), Randy hasn't converted ANY of his debt to equity, and is making AVFC pay him back. Is this right, and if so I guess Randy is either not as rich as we thought, or is losing interest.
Quote from: Daily Telegraph 5th March 2010
The new investment takes Lerner's total investment to £179 million since he bought the club in 2006, with £95 million in equity and a further £84 million in loans. The investment comes on top of the £62 million he paid for the club.
Lerner put £70 million into the club during the 2008-09 season, with a further £12.5 million at the start of this campaign. According to the accounts Lerner's loans to the club are unsecured and interest free, and repayable between 2016 and 2019.[/quote]
-
We received about £35,000,000 for 2 alone and have spent about £13,000,000. allegedly we have repaid Randy some £15,000,000 in respect of a loan leaving us with at least £7,000,000 left BUT the manager has no money to spend. Bent and Makoun were purchased with the Milner cash in a moment of panic when things did look bad and relegation was a strong possibility.
So in an age when most mega rich owners are converting their debt in equity (in effect cancelling the money a club owes them), Randy hasn't converted ANY of his debt to equity, and is making AVFC pay him back. Is this right, and if so I guess Randy is either not as rich as we thought, or is losing interest.
Quote from: Daily Telegraph 5th March 2010
The new investment takes Lerner's total investment to £179 million since he bought the club in 2006, with £95 million in equity and a further £84 million in loans. The investment comes on top of the £62 million he paid for the club.
Lerner put £70 million into the club during the 2008-09 season, with a further £12.5 million at the start of this campaign. According to the accounts Lerner's loans to the club are unsecured and interest free, and repayable between 2016 and 2019.
Where on earth did all that money get spent?
-
When you consider Nigel Reo Coker cost us at least £15 million for no return, you start to realise.
-
When you consider Nigel Reo Coker cost us at least £15 million for no return, you start to realise.
True, but it's not as if the club had no income.
-
When you consider Nigel Reo Coker cost us at least £15 million for no return, you start to realise.
True, but it's not as if the club had no income.
Yes, but an entire team like that. It's unreal. Then there's the Holte, Bodymoor Heath, the bits & pieces around the ground that we never notice but all add up.
-
When you consider Nigel Reo Coker cost us at least £15 million for no return, you start to realise.
True, but it's not as if the club had no income.
Yes, but an entire team like that. It's unreal. Then there's the Holte, Bodymoor Heath, the bits & pieces around the ground that we never notice but all add up.
Even so, I am struggling to see where that much money would have gone.
-
When you consider Nigel Reo Coker cost us at least £15 million for no return, you start to realise.
True, but it's not as if the club had no income.
Yes, but an entire team like that. It's unreal. Then there's the Holte, Bodymoor Heath, the bits & pieces around the ground that we never notice but all add up.
Even so, I am struggling to see where that much money would have gone.
Me too, but this is football. Nothing makes sense.
-
We received about £35,000,000 for 2 alone and have spent about £13,000,000. allegedly we have repaid Randy some £15,000,000 in respect of a loan leaving us with at least £7,000,000 left BUT the manager has no money to spend. Bent and Makoun were purchased with the Milner cash in a moment of panic when things did look bad and relegation was a strong possibility.
So in an age when most mega rich owners are converting their debt in equity (in effect cancelling the money a club owes them), Randy hasn't converted ANY of his debt to equity, and is making AVFC pay him back. Is this right, and if so I guess Randy is either not as rich as we thought, or is losing interest.
Quote from: Daily Telegraph 5th March 2010
The new investment takes Lerner's total investment to £179 million since he bought the club in 2006, with £95 million in equity and a further £84 million in loans. The investment comes on top of the £62 million he paid for the club.
Lerner put £70 million into the club during the 2008-09 season, with a further £12.5 million at the start of this campaign. According to the accounts Lerner's loans to the club are unsecured and interest free, and repayable between 2016 and 2019.
[/quote]
Thanks for that. If I read it right (and I'm just a tiler!) He's paid £62m for the club (a bargain), given the club £95m, and AVFC have to pay him back £84m in the next 5 to 8 years?? Where the hell are we/they gonna get that from?
-
We received about £35,000,000 for 2 alone and have spent about £13,000,000. allegedly we have repaid Randy some £15,000,000 in respect of a loan leaving us with at least £7,000,000 left BUT the manager has no money to spend. Bent and Makoun were purchased with the Milner cash in a moment of panic when things did look bad and relegation was a strong possibility.
So in an age when most mega rich owners are converting their debt in equity (in effect cancelling the money a club owes them), Randy hasn't converted ANY of his debt to equity, and is making AVFC pay him back. Is this right, and if so I guess Randy is either not as rich as we thought, or is losing interest.
Quote from: Daily Telegraph 5th March 2010
The new investment takes Lerner's total investment to £179 million since he bought the club in 2006, with £95 million in equity and a further £84 million in loans. The investment comes on top of the £62 million he paid for the club.
Lerner put £70 million into the club during the 2008-09 season, with a further £12.5 million at the start of this campaign. According to the accounts Lerner's loans to the club are unsecured and interest free, and repayable between 2016 and 2019.
[/quote]
quote Swiss Ramble April 2010
The interest charged on the debt is at a standard rate of LIBOR plus 2%, which is currently very low at below 3%, but it should be noted that if LIBOR rose to 5%, then the club would have to pay 7%. The accounts report £5.7m interest payable, including £4.5m on the loan notes (which goes to Lerner) and £0.8m on bank loans. This may not seem much, but it does represent about 5% of revenue. If that is added to Reform Acquisition Limited’s £7.7m management fees, then you could argue that Lerner took out nearly 15% of revenue, which would be excessive if repeated every year. So Lerner’s approach is rather more hard-nosed than has been reported in the media.
-
When you consider Nigel Reo Coker cost us at least £15 million for no return, you start to realise.
True, but it's not as if the club had no income.
Yes, but an entire team like that. It's unreal. Then there's the Holte, Bodymoor Heath, the bits & pieces around the ground that we never notice but all add up.
We didn't have an entire team like that though did we? Other players who have left over the last 2 summers have brought in about £60m
-
We received about £35,000,000 for 2 alone and have spent about £13,000,000. allegedly we have repaid Randy some £15,000,000 in respect of a loan leaving us with at least £7,000,000 left BUT the manager has no money to spend. Bent and Makoun were purchased with the Milner cash in a moment of panic when things did look bad and relegation was a strong possibility.
So in an age when most mega rich owners are converting their debt in equity (in effect cancelling the money a club owes them), Randy hasn't converted ANY of his debt to equity, and is making AVFC pay him back. Is this right, and if so I guess Randy is either not as rich as we thought, or is losing interest.
Quote from: Daily Telegraph 5th March 2010
The new investment takes Lerner's total investment to £179 million since he bought the club in 2006, with £95 million in equity and a further £84 million in loans. The investment comes on top of the £62 million he paid for the club.
Lerner put £70 million into the club during the 2008-09 season, with a further £12.5 million at the start of this campaign. According to the accounts Lerner's loans to the club are unsecured and interest free, and repayable between 2016 and 2019.
[/quote]
quote Swiss Ramble April 2010
The interest charged on the debt is at a standard rate of LIBOR plus 2%, which is currently very low at below 3%, but it should be noted that if LIBOR rose to 5%, then the club would have to pay 7%. The accounts report £5.7m interest payable, including £4.5m on the loan notes (which goes to Lerner) and £0.8m on bank loans. This may not seem much, but it does represent about 5% of revenue. If that is added to Reform Acquisition Limited’s £7.7m management fees, then you could argue that Lerner took out nearly 15% of revenue, which would be excessive if repeated every year. So Lerner’s approach is rather more hard-nosed than has been reported in the media.
[/quote]
£7.7m in "Management Fees"???!!!
-
A lot of 'ifs' in that Robby.
-
Thanks for that. If I read it right (and I'm just a tiler!) He's paid £62m for the club (a bargain), given the club £95m, and AVFC have to pay him back £84m in the next 5 to 8 years?? Where the hell are we/they gonna get that from?
I think it's a bit worse than that, as those figures came from the 2009 results and we lost £30m in the next year, so presumably Randy pumped in more equity and/or loans.
On the other hand, my understanding is that Villa the club don't owe the money, it's Reform Aquisitions Limited (RAL) that owes the money and that the money came from the Lerner Trust. RAL are paying back the interest from income the club earns. When the principal becomes due (i.e. when the loans have to be paid back) it would be likely that they will be re-negotiated, the alternative being that RAL would have to liquidate assets (sell players or land or whatever) to pay his own Trust back which, given Randy's attitude since he bought the club and despite the shoeing he's been given lately, I'd deem most unlikely.
-
quote Swiss Ramble April 2010
The interest charged on the debt is at a standard rate of LIBOR plus 2%, which is currently very low at below 3%, but it should be noted that if LIBOR rose to 5%, then the club would have to pay 7%. The accounts report £5.7m interest payable, including £4.5m on the loan notes (which goes to Lerner) and £0.8m on bank loans. This may not seem much, but it does represent about 5% of revenue. If that is added to Reform Acquisition Limited’s £7.7m management fees, then you could argue that Lerner took out nearly 15% of revenue, which would be excessive if repeated every year. So Lerner’s approach is rather more hard-nosed than has been reported in the media.
£7.7m in "Management Fees"???!!!
Which have never been explained.
-
A lot of 'ifs' in that Robby.
There are Chris but if you were offered a variable mortgage at say 3% would you budget for it always being that or would you look at a worse case scenario before deciding whether you could afford it. (Assuming you need a mortgage of course ;) )
Also it highlights that the loans are not interest free and as others have said what about the management charges.
I do agree that there is a danger in trying to extrapolate too far and financials are way out of date before we ever get to see them. Therefore the management charges for instance could be a one off.
-
It all adds up to a lot of money.
-
Also it highlights that the loans are not interest free ...
No it doesn't. The original loans to buy Villa were as you stated, charged an interest rate. As the Telegraph article I posted stated, the 2009 loans were not only interest-free but unsecured.
-
Well written piece and I doubt we will get the answers to many questions raised- we need new investment if we are to compete at the highest level but multiple billionaire Arabs are in short supply - maybe midtable mediocrity is where the future lies - apart from the top 6 clubs I think the rest are sadly just making up the numbers.
Sadly the game is now far too much about money and the game has changed for the worse in so many ways.
-
Missing from the outgoings are the multi millions paid to either release or compensate Lerners managerial appointments.
That probably takes up the remainder.
My question would be simple.
How is Randy using his business accumen to increase revenue at the club ?
Agree with the first part. There's been a hell of a lot of compensation paid out which leads me to my question:
How is Randy using his sports management accumen to improve his football decision making at the club?
-
Some points to answer in the original post though aren't there.
How did we offer improved terms to all and sundry if we now have to get people off the wage bill to tie up a free transfer? Particularly as we have knocked 12 players off said wage bill this summer, to include some very high earners?
When did we suddenly become such keen accountants?
And, on The General, Sandie is right. They have dangled the poor sod out to dry. He is a genuine and honest bloke. I get the impression that he isn't really being kept in the loop of what is going on.
God help us if we get a run of injuries again this year.
-
£7.7m in "Management Fees"???!!!
Alot of the comments here do seem to suggest that everyone would like a benefactor who gives us everything and takes nothing in return. Is that really realistic?
The original post was about a piece written by someone I recall being incredibly opinionated and obdurate ... I struggle to read it without thinking about the author's agenda.
The intesting discussion above simply underlines to me how far away from 'football' the Premiership has moved. I'm quite jaundiced, I'm afraid, about the whole thing, right now.
-
£7.7m in managment fee's, ridiculous, lets hope he's now Lernerd his lesson
-
The club also sold off a parcel of land (which bit, I don't know) and have in the last year formed a new company for dealing in real estate.
-
Some points to answer in the original post though aren't there.
How did we offer improved terms to all and sundry if we now have to get people off the wage bill to tie up a free transfer? Particularly as we have knocked 12 players off said wage bill this summer, to include some very high earners?
When did we suddenly become such keen accountants?
And, on The General, Sandie is right. They have dangled the poor sod out to dry. He is a genuine and honest bloke. I get the impression that he isn't really being kept in the loop of what is going on.
God help us if we get a run of injuries again this year.
The change is forced on us by the FFP rules.
-
Dear Mr Lerner, in one sentence, can you please tell me what your long term intentions are regarding the football club I love?
-
Dear Mr Lerner, in one sentence, can you please tell me what your long term intentions are regarding the football club I love?
Did you get the letter last week? Their intentions are set out there.
-
The trouble is Chris, I don't see anyone else rushing to comply.
And we didn't care about compliance earlier in the summer when we were talking to some of the names on our original managerial shortlist.
I am intrigued as to why we have changed tack now?
-
Dear Mr Lerner, in one sentence, can you please tell me what your long term intentions are regarding the football club I love?
Did you get the letter last week? Their intentions are set out there.
Got the letter. Hence the question.
Thought I knew what the LONG TERM intentions were. The intentions set out in the letter seem to be short term only.
-
The trouble is Chris, I don't see anyone else rushing to comply.
And we didn't care about compliance earlier in the summer when we were talking to some of the names on our original managerial shortlist.
I am intrigued as to why we have changed tack now?
I think a lot of other clubs already comply or are close to it. Article I read a while back said that us, Chelsea and Man City had the most work to do. You can see by the noises coming out of Spurs that they are also conscious of the impact.
Perhaps the reason Benitez, for example, was overlooked was because he couldn't work within the new rules.
-
Dear Mr Lerner, in one sentence, can you please tell me what your long term intentions are regarding the football club I love?
Did you get the letter last week? Their intentions are set out there.
Got the letter. Hence the question.
Thought I knew what the LONG TERM intentions were. The intentions set out in the letter seem to be short term only.
Sorry, got you now. I am not sure how long term they can be beyond generalisations.
-
Well I havent read all the thread but I think I get the general idea.
Mr Lerner Sir
When you bought our club a few years back the club badge was re-designed and one star was put next to the lion rampant. I have since that time invested approximately £500 of my capital each season on the understanding that by now at least a couple more stars would be added to that. Indeed as an investor of my capital in Aston Villa for many years I consider it is a basic human right that I should be able to watch us now at least be on the verge of completely dominating european and world football. How much longer do I have to wait before I am watching continually entertaining winning football for 90 minutes week in week out using a financial model that allows the club to pay us money to come and watch it ?
Yours faithfully,
Some bloke who saw us in the 3rd division.
-
Just read an interesting article on sportingintelligence.com about why Chelski ain't bothered about FFP, which I am aware of but tried to ignore....til now!
The 2 year "audit" won't kick in for another 2 years...and wages/contracts agreed prior to 2010 can be pretty much ovelooked. As long as the club can prove they are moving in the "right direction" there won't be any sanctions.
Apologies for those who have already clocked this.
-
Some points to answer in the original post though aren't there.
How did we offer improved terms to all and sundry if we now have to get people off the wage bill to tie up a free transfer? Particularly as we have knocked 12 players off said wage bill this summer, to include some very high earners?
When did we suddenly become such keen accountants?
And, on The General, Sandie is right. They have dangled the poor sod out to dry. He is a genuine and honest bloke. I get the impression that he isn't really being kept in the loop of what is going on.
God help us if we get a run of injuries again this year.
The change is forced on us by the FFP rules.
Except of course, clubs don't really have to break even for years. From the regulations:
"The acceptable deviation is EUR 5 million. However it can exceed this level up
to the following amounts only if such excess is entirely covered by contributions
from equity participants and/or related parties:
a) EUR 45 million for the monitoring period assessed in the licence seasons
2013/14 and 2014/15;
b) EUR 30 million for the monitoring period assessed in the licence seasons
2015/16, 2016/17 and 2017/18;"
So in seven years time, clubs could still be making losses of the best part of £30m. The new rules have nothing to do with our current position, and everything to do with Lerner's inability to run a business properly.
-
The trouble is Chris, I don't see anyone else rushing to comply.
And we didn't care about compliance earlier in the summer when we were talking to some of the names on our original managerial shortlist.
I am intrigued as to why we have changed tack now?
I think a lot of other clubs already comply or are close to it. Article I read a while back said that us, Chelsea and Man City had the most work to do. You can see by the noises coming out of Spurs that they are also conscious of the impact.
Perhaps the reason Benitez, for example, was overlooked was because he couldn't work within the new rules.
There is absolutely no current danger of Aston Villa failing the FFP rules or being anywhere close to failing FFP rules.
-
Not that it matters anyway.
-
Except of course, clubs don't really have to break even for years. From the regulations:
"The acceptable deviation is EUR 5 million. However it can exceed this level up
to the following amounts only if such excess is entirely covered by contributions
from equity participants and/or related parties:
a) EUR 45 million for the monitoring period assessed in the licence seasons
2013/14 and 2014/15;
b) EUR 30 million for the monitoring period assessed in the licence seasons
2015/16, 2016/17 and 2017/18;"
So in seven years time, clubs could still be making losses of the best part of £30m. The new rules have nothing to do with our current position, and everything to do with Lerner's inability to run a business properly.
Or that he has either changed his mind/tack due to current financial situation, OR, given it a go for 4/5 years and decided he doesn't like it anymore.
My earlier reference to "long term" plans applies as I'm pretty sure that is what WE are all interested in.
-
"There is absolutely no current danger of Aston Villa failing the FFP rules or being anywhere close to failing FFP rules."
Thanks Villa'Zawg.
Pretty much what I've discovered this morning.
-
"There is absolutely no current danger of Aston Villa failing the FFP rules or being anywhere close to failing FFP rules."
Thanks Villa'Zawg.
Pretty much what I've discovered this morning.
Indeed, it's a complete red herring. One of the by-products of Lerner's (in)actions is that we might comply with the new rules by default, but as I posted, there's a grace period for the next 6 years in any case, and despite what Chris says, this new period of austerity is nothing to do with the FFP rules.
-
I respect what RL, the General and his team have done ( especially recognition of our Euro success) and are now doing within the confines of good Corporate Governance. I understand the current emphasis on fiscal sustainability especially in regard to the ridiculous percentage of gross revenue that comprises our wage bill.
However, the letter was mis-directed imho. It made sense as a letter to corporate shareholders with a stake in the profitability of the company. It did little however, to address the concerns of the companies customers. Us. As supporters can no longer can be shareholders ST holders MUST be respected as primary customers.
Although we must be mindful of the need for a solid financial base we want to know that there are plans in place to re-invest in the team and improve every year. To seek, or rather demand success as a Club on the field of play so that the virtuous cycle of tangible success drives greater profits via bigger crowds and deeper third party support in the shape of sponsors. We need to know that management is committed to that.
We only have to look across the City to see how bad it could be and how comparatively lucky we are. We only have to remember Risdale and Leeds to see how a lack of financial control can damage the Club.
I understand all that but where is the plan articulated from Owner/Management for improving our core product? Our Football Team.
(Sorry so long).
-
I have been a staunch defender of the board and was always told that cash is available which is why I have argued with posters here in the past to that end.
That's not what I am hearing from the club now though.
By the way Chris, the Benitez thing didn't fall over on the finances we had available. There was plenty.
It fell down because he wanted MONesque control of salaries and transfer fees.
-
We are not alone though are we? i suppose Tottenham and ourselves are the two clubs who did try to break the monopoly at the top and are now both left with overpaid players who no-one else wants. It is a sad fact that United, chelsea and City will year by year cherry pick the best players from all other clubs in the premiership. Watching Asley Young get Uniteds winner really pissed me off as he is far better that anyone else we have or likely to get. We now have three teams who can win the league year on year, very similar to Scottish football who have two. I blame Randy only for the mismanagement of the club not the amount of money he has put in.
I did think On Saturday that we looked like a side that was pre Lerner.
-
I have been a staunch defender of the board and was always told that cash is available which is why I have argued with posters here in the past to that end.
That's not what I am hearing from the club now though.
By the way Chris, the Benitez thing didn't fall over on the finances we had available. There was plenty.
It fell down because he wanted MONesque control of salaries and transfer fees.
That's what I said, by wanting full control he would not be working within the new rules. Yes, there might be a period of grace but we still have to get our house in order. We've seen how difficult it is to shift players and it will only get more difficult as clubs try to balance their books coupled with the 25 man squad rule.
I'm still waiting for an alternative to having a wage bill matched to income.
-
Robbo _ "Watching Asley Young get Uniteds winner "
As an aside I have had the dubious luxury (third world tv) of watching United throughout pre-season, the Com Shield and their Prem game.
In a red shirt our Mr. Young has not fallen over, winced while clutching his ankle after every tackle, remonstrated with the Ref/crowd arms akimbo pleading an injustice AND his crossing has been excellent. As has his distribution, running off the ball and workrate. After seeing Mr. Downings confident run and stunning shot against the bar for Liverpool it makes me wonder what is different?
Off topic. Robbo's fault. :)
-
Good post Simba!
Exactly the situation and what most of us will be thinking/aware of.
Surely, the team and its performances are the main things that will affect revenue. RL has invested loads. We've come on leaps and bounds as a club and had the respect of most other clubs/fans in the country - good owner, manager, improving team, better facilities, happy supporters etc. We didn't quite break through but surely to come this far and not build upon that improvement/progress or stop/give up/change purpose/intentions makes no sense at all. We seem to have stopped going in the right direction.
-
Written by an evictee from here and published on a certain blog...
So people can be banned from here and moderators see fit to use their opinions to provoke response here ?
Written by an evictee from here and published on a certain blog...
So people can be banned from here and moderators see fit to use their opinions to provoke response here ?
What are you going on about? It's a post I read elsewhere that I thought deserving of discussion.
You're a Mod Leeg - not allowed to have an opnion ;¬)
-
I have been a staunch defender of the board and was always told that cash is available which is why I have argued with posters here in the past to that end.
That's not what I am hearing from the club now though.
By the way Chris, the Benitez thing didn't fall over on the finances we had available. There was plenty.
It fell down because he wanted MONesque control of salaries and transfer fees.
That's what I said, by wanting full control he would not be working within the new rules. Yes, there might be a period of grace but we still have to get our house in order. We've seen how difficult it is to shift players and it will only get more difficult as clubs try to balance their books coupled with the 25 man squad rule.
I'm still waiting for an alternative to having a wage bill matched to income.
I'm not sure why you think we have difficulty moving players on. These are the players that played at least one game for us last season and are no longer on our wage bill;
Carew, Davies, Downing, Friedel, Milner, Osbourne, Pires, Reo-Coker, Sidwell, Walker, Young A
I've got no problem discussing alternatives with you but I can't get replies to even the most straightforward of questions e.g. the gap between revenue and wages was £10.7m in Doug's last year, how much do you think that gap needs to be now? From that we can work out a budget for wages.
-
We are not alone in the wage bill/revenue issue. And it should be argued that bilionaire owners/investors are ruining the Premier League. In fact it could be argued that the Premier League ruined the traditional competitiveness of English Football. It could also be argued - this week- that paying these young players what we have to has created massive social issues as they flaunt their ridiculous wealth to the dissaffected youth of the land. After all, they are role models. Still, that one is for the sociologists.
What cannot be argued is that the investor/owners are in it to make money unless they see it as a toy and or tax loss. Again I have no issue with the manner in which RL has invested and his expectation of a decent return.
On condition that it does not surplant the target of success for the Club on the field. If it does then change the financial model, let supporters buy shares for eg. OK it possibly dilutes RL's profit (dependant on sahre price in an IPO) but also his necessary long term investment.
I think that he may be leading to this given the letter.Just a thought. I love the Barcelona model.
RL loves sport and saw a good investment in a good club. He didn't buy us because we are supported by the Prime Minister, future King, a rather boring violinist and Tom (Forest Gump ) Hanks.
Mind you at the moment Aston Villa IS like a box of chocolates and we don't know what we are gonna get. :)
-
Missing from the outgoings are the multi millions paid to either release or compensate Lerners managerial appointments.
That probably takes up the remainder.
My question would be simple.
How is Randy using his business accumen to increase revenue at the club ?
He hasn't, simple as. I think he'll sell up before long - the failure to land a top-four slot during MON's tenure has screwed up his 5 year plan. I don't think he's really got any plan now except to keep the money men happy.
-
VZ, the ratio between wages income is the issue not the amount surely - 60% being on often quoted as an ideal. Manu, for example, are at 46% while at City it is 107%. According to Deloitte it is the mid ranking clubs who have the most to fear with the next TV deal expected to be about a quarter less than the present one.
-
VZ, the ratio between wages income is the issue not the amount surely - 60% being on often quoted as an ideal. Manu, for example, are at 46% while at City it is 107%. According to Deloitte it is the mid ranking clubs who have the most to fear with the next TV deal expected to be about a quarter less than the present one.
The ratio is interesting from an analysis perspective but it is the actual amounts that count in terms of running each individual club. Our Revenue/Wages ratio for the year before Randy was 78%, would that be OK to use for now with a target of 70% or so in the medium term? Or do you feel we need to drop immediately to 50% or something?
Everything I've read about TV revenue suggest there are likely to be further significant increases, particularly in the overseas contracts. Where did Deloitte say they are likely to drop 25%?
-
Missing from the outgoings are the multi millions paid to either release or compensate Lerners managerial appointments.
That probably takes up the remainder.
My question would be simple.
How is Randy using his business accumen to increase revenue at the club ?
He hasn't, simple as. I think he'll sell up before long - the failure to land a top-four slot during MON's tenure has screwed up his 5 year plan. I don't think he's really got any plan now except to keep the money men happy.
I think if RL got a half decent offer tomorrow he would walk.
And as for his business acumen in running a football club, he quite simply has none
-
In their report published in June. Can't post a link but it was widely reported in the media at the time.
-
I was listening to Albion and man ure yesterday and Young was most definately up to his old going down too easy tricks
-
That's a very good opening post. But we can ask - or shout - all the questions we like; I think the club have hands over their ears now. That's why the communication via the General has more or less ceased - he knows we're no longer buying what he says, we know we can't really expect him to tell us what's really happening with the club. I don't think we've actually spent a single £1 net in the transfer market for two years. I'm just hoping at some point we're back on an even keel, but I don't know when that will be.
-
I'd have thought the tv revenue must drop at some point soon.
Surely Sky have no competition by now, and they'd effectively be the only bidders?
Unless, of course, they're bidding against the threat of the bigger clubs doing their own individual deals.
-
Unless, of course, they're bidding against the threat of the bigger clubs doing their own individual deals.
Although that may be the case, I think the fact also exists that the PL know what they're worth to Sky in terms of subscriptions, so should they try to drop the price a game of brinksmanship would develop. But they're too copsy in bed together for that. At best/worst all I can see is the rate at which the money increases being slowed down.
-
In their report published in June. Can't post a link but it was widely reported in the media at the time.
Ah right. They were talking about lower league TV deals not Premier League.
All of the serious analysis suggests there is plenty of scope for more growth in TV revenue. The anticipated growth in overseas markets more than makes up for any potential slower growth in domestic markets.
-
I'd have thought the tv revenue must drop at some point soon.
Surely Sky have no competition by now, and they'd effectively be the only bidders?
Unless, of course, they're bidding against the threat of the bigger clubs doing their own individual deals.
I've often thought that
take sky out of the equation and would their be any other competitive bids?
I think the reason why the Glasers got into man Ure was due to the fact that I think clubs can sell their games over the internet which will be massive
-
In their report published in June. Can't post a link but it was widely reported in the media at the time.
I think this is what you are referring to Chris
http://www.deloitte.com/view/en_GB/uk/industries/sportsbusinessgroup/sports/football/annual-review-of-football-finance-2011/6b5666645ae60310VgnVCM2000001b56f00aRCRD.htm (http://www.deloitte.com/view/en_GB/uk/industries/sportsbusinessgroup/sports/football/annual-review-of-football-finance-2011/6b5666645ae60310VgnVCM2000001b56f00aRCRD.htm)
The 25% reduction though refers to Championship clubs. I think we all hope that won't apply to us.
-
In their report published in June. Can't post a link but it was widely reported in the media at the time.
Ah right. They were talking about lower league TV deals not Premier League.
All of the serious analysis suggests there is plenty of scope for more growth in TV revenue. The anticipated growth in overseas markets more than makes up for any potential slower growth in domestic markets.
Sorry, my mistake. The substantial point of keeping wages as a proportion of revenue still applies though.
-
Substantive not substantial, bastard phone.
-
In their report published in June. Can't post a link but it was widely reported in the media at the time.
Ah right. They were talking about lower league TV deals not Premier League.
All of the serious analysis suggests there is plenty of scope for more growth in TV revenue. The anticipated growth in overseas markets more than makes up for any potential slower growth in domestic markets.
Sorry, my mistake. The substantial point of keeping wages as a proportion of revenue still applies though.
What proportion should you budget for though?
-
Why are we worried about regulations it is unlikely we will need to comply by?
-
Another point Pelty, at the point that you dont trust the Manager it is time to get rid, so why did he give MON more money to waste?
It is not so much about mistrust - I chose my words poorly because, I agree, you get rid of people you do not trust. For the year or so prior to MON leaving, there were repeated attempts to get him to sort the wage bill out a bit with assurances made that this would be done. It came to a head last August when RL held the line on opening the coffers *until* the wage bill was sorted. Transfer money is NOT the issue; it is all about getting the club's finances sustainable. He is unwilling to lose 20 million a year, simple as. I happen to agree with those who say that stricter controls should have been placed on MON, but I think paulie had it right that there was reliance on the reputation of MON *and* that his ability to get the club in striking distance of the CL was tantalizing enough to take risks in the hopes that it would pay off. That did not work, so there is a desire, I think, to adopt another approach that does not see him pissing money down the drain. The long-term goal remains to compete for CL spots (and do not moan at me about the realism, or lack thereof, of this in the current structure, as I have nothing to do with it), but clearly it will be done with a combination of youth and experience. My $.02.
-
Is there a reason you are posting this and not the General? Has he retired from the fans' forums for good?
-
If we're losing £20m this year then things are clearly worse than we have been led to believe.
What happened to the list of players houlier was going to buy and the general talking about backing Mcleish which quite clearly was never going to happen. You have to admit this is misleading at best.
As far as blame who would you say is responsible for the finances of the club. Surely somebody would have been making forward projections of costs and how that looks against current revenues before making any purchases. At the end of the day surely the buck stops with Randy.
I agree to a degree; mistakes were made and the buck does stop with Randy, but that is also a gross simplification of a rather complex issue. Still, you are right on the whole (in my opinion, of course).
As for the general's comments, they were made under the assumption that certain obligations were going to be met that have not yet been met. He should have been more circumspect in this instance. That said, at the time given what he knew, there was reason to state them. I know this is cryptic, but I really have nothing more to say about it.
-
Is there a reason you are posting this and not the General? Has he retired from the fans' forums for good?
Am I not allowed to speak, Risso, and add a perspective? I do not know that he has retired for good, but he is far busier these days given his new position. People can chastise him for this, but the facts are the facts.
-
The fact is that even if he came back, he'd just get shouted at, and the things being shouted - no matter how relevant or valid they may be - would be the same as the things getting shouted on the villa talk thread. I think (my view, not that of H&V) that there's not much value for anyone in that.
-
If we're losing £20m this year then things are clearly worse than we have been led to believe.
What happened to the list of players houlier was going to buy and the general talking about backing Mcleish which quite clearly was never going to happen. You have to admit this is misleading at best.
As far as blame who would you say is responsible for the finances of the club. Surely somebody would have been making forward projections of costs and how that looks against current revenues before making any purchases. At the end of the day surely the buck stops with Randy.
I agree to a degree; mistakes were made and the buck does stop with Randy, but that is also a gross simplification of a rather complex issue. Still, you are right on the whole (in my opinion, of course).
As for the general's comments, they were made under the assumption that certain obligations were going to be met that have not yet been met. He should have been more circumspect in this instance. That said, at the time given what he knew, there was reason to state them. I know this is cryptic, but I really have nothing more to say about it.
I appreciate how difficult it is in your position and I am grateful for your response.
-
Is there a reason you are posting this and not the General? Has he retired from the fans' forums for good?
Am I not allowed to speak, Risso, and add a perspective? I do not know that he has retired for good, but he is far busier these days given his new position. People can chastise him for this, but the facts are the facts.
Of course you are allowed an opinion. I only ask as the General was in touch asking us to reopen his thread, and then never posted again.
Interesting cryptic comments about "certain obligations". I wonder what they are that they are so important that within the space of a month, we have gone from "imagine what McLeish could do with an owner like Randy's backing" to having to move players on before even a very average loan like Hitzlsperger could be sanctioned. Given that you said earlier that spending has ceased as losses were still running at £20m, it must have been a substantial obligation indeed.
-
I agree, Paulie. There's not really an awful lot for the General to say; the penny has dropped (certainly with me) and I can't expect him to post on here, taking the frustration of the fans and trying to deliver answers that satisfy our questions, while still painting a positive picture. It's certainly not fair to expect that. I think we've all grasped the situation now, desperately disappointing though it is.
-
Is there a reason you are posting this and not the General? Has he retired from the fans' forums for good?
Am I not allowed to speak, Risso, and add a perspective? I do not know that he has retired for good, but he is far busier these days given his new position. People can chastise him for this, but the facts are the facts.
Unfair to pick on you here Pelty, and understand the General has other priorities, but are you able to provide us with any insight as to why he chose to avoid posting on here when he was posting on other sites ?
-
Pelty, any such chance that these obligations may still be met?
-
Is there a reason you are posting this and not the General? Has he retired from the fans' forums for good?
Am I not allowed to speak, Risso, and add a perspective? I do not know that he has retired for good, but he is far busier these days given his new position. People can chastise him for this, but the facts are the facts.
Of course you are allowed an opinion. I only ask as the General was in touch asking us to reopen his thread, and then never posted again.
Interesting cryptic comments about "certain obligations". I wonder what they are that they are so important that within the space of a month, we have gone from "imagine what McLeish could do with an owner like Randy's backing" to having to move players on before even a very average loan like Hitzlsperger could be sanctioned. Given that you said earlier that spending has ceased as losses were still running at £20m, it must have been a substantial obligation indeed.
I'm as intrigued as you by these 'oblingations', but lets not forget that bits in bold were our speculation and a paper rumour, as opposed to anything from the club!
-
Is there a reason you are posting this and not the General? Has he retired from the fans' forums for good?
Am I not allowed to speak, Risso, and add a perspective? I do not know that he has retired for good, but he is far busier these days given his new position. People can chastise him for this, but the facts are the facts.
Of course you are allowed an opinion. I only ask as the General was in touch asking us to reopen his thread, and then never posted again.
Interesting cryptic comments about "certain obligations". I wonder what they are that they are so important that within the space of a month, we have gone from "imagine what McLeish could do with an owner like Randy's backing" to having to move players on before even a very average loan like Hitzlsperger could be sanctioned. Given that you said earlier that spending has ceased as losses were still running at £20m, it must have been a substantial obligation indeed.
I'm as intrigued as you by these 'oblingations', but lets not forget that bits in bold were our speculation and a paper rumour, as opposed to anything from the club!
The first bit in bold was a paraphrased quote from The General, the second was more or less what McLeish himself said last week. Not just tabloid speculation at all.
-
Can't speak for Pelty but reading that, I'd take the certain obligations to mean the shifting of the likes oh Heskey and Beye.
This two are costing us approx 5.5m a year between them. That's a big chunk of wage bill.
-
Don't think they were speculation, John - first bolded statement was a direct quote from GK, posting and explaining the recruitment of AM; second was a direct quote from AM from a press conference, naming Hitz as a player he had talked about and then referred to the need to trim the wage bill further before being able to bring in the new midfield player he had identified we needed.
Speaking of which, I wish we hadn't cancelled Bradley's deal now.
-
Don't think they were speculation, John - first bolded statement was a direct quote from GK, posting and explaining the recruitment of AM; second was a direct quote from AM from a press conference, naming Hitz as a player he had talked about and then referred to the need to trim the wage bill further before being able to bring in the new midfield player he had identified we needed.
Speaking of which, I wish we hadn't cancelled Bradley's deal now.
Thats a point. The wages and money was supposedly already set aside for Bradley. (which was speculation)
-
I know. I've thought about that all summer, but kept quiet before chucking that one in. That was £2.5m supposedly 'saved' to pursue other targets. Which may have gone towards Given or The Zog, of course.
-
Can't speak for Pelty but reading that, I'd take the certain obligations to mean the shifting of the likes oh Heskey and Beye.
This two are costing us approx 5.5m a year between them. That's a big chunk of wage bill.
At least Heskey started the match, and would therefore appear to be firmly in McLeish's plans.
Why would Beye take a pay cut to move elsewhere? If ever there was a point when Lerner should have booted O'Neill out of his office, it was the day he suggested signing that pair. If I was Lerner I'd cry myself to sleep every night at the amount wasted on that pair, and that's after setting fire to a similar amount after the Marlon Harewood purchase. Maybe Randy is a KLF fan and just wanted to outdo Bill Drummond setting fire to a million quid on a remore Scottish hill!
-
Can't speak for Pelty but reading that, I'd take the certain obligations to mean the shifting of the likes oh Heskey and Beye.
This two are costing us approx 5.5m a year between them. That's a big chunk of wage bill.
That's what I read too. Maybe we were close to flogging Heskey to Leicester but it fell through at the last minute. This kind of stuff must happen all the time behind the scenes. Maybe some extra finance was in the offing but feel through?
-
Is there a reason you are posting this and not the General? Has he retired from the fans' forums for good?
Am I not allowed to speak, Risso, and add a perspective? I do not know that he has retired for good, but he is far busier these days given his new position. People can chastise him for this, but the facts are the facts.
Unfair to pick on you here Pelty, and understand the General has other priorities, but are you able to provide us with any insight as to why he chose to avoid posting on here when he was posting on other sites ?
CJ, I think he has tried to communicate with the mods about the thread structure and once that is straightened out, he will post there. I do not know the specifics, honestly. It has nothing at all to do with this site, the mods, or the people on it. Maybe the mods are unclear on his wishes and if that is the case, I hope they will ask for clarification. Again, it is nothing about this site in particular. We are dealing with an "old dog" here, so "new tricks" do not come easily, I guess!
-
Can't speak for Pelty but reading that, I'd take the certain obligations to mean the shifting of the likes oh Heskey and Beye.
This two are costing us approx 5.5m a year between them. That's a big chunk of wage bill.
At least Heskey started the match, and would therefore appear to be firmly in McLeish's plans.
Why would Beye take a pay cut to move elsewhere? If ever there was a point when Lerner should have booted O'Neill out of his office, it was the day he suggested signing that pair. If I was Lerner I'd cry myself to sleep every night at the amount wasted on that pair, and that's after setting fire to a similar amount after the Marlon Harewood purchase. Maybe Randy is a KLF fan and just wanted to outdo Bill Drummond setting fire to a million quid on a remore Scottish hill!
He might, given the choice of 65k a week to spend elsewhere or keeping Heskey, prefer the former but tjink that in the meantime he might a well use him.
Your point about Randy and those pair, I entirely agree with, but isn't that a pointer as to why he's so eager to reduce the wage bill?
-
Can't speak for Pelty but reading that, I'd take the certain obligations to mean the shifting of the likes oh Heskey and Beye.
This two are costing us approx 5.5m a year between them. That's a big chunk of wage bill.
That is a start. Like most of the posts I read here, I personally would like to see things done a bit more methodically, but then, it is not my 20 million, so it is easy to take such a stance. As stated above, if the wage bill gets right, then transfer money is available; this I know to be true. Until revenues push up in such a way that it is allowed, however, I doubt we will see wages of the sort seen at City or even in the MON days (except on select players). This last bit is my opinion, not an ITK in any way...
-
Another point Pelty, at the point that you dont trust the Manager it is time to get rid, so why did he give MON more money to waste?
It is not so much about mistrust - I chose my words poorly because, I agree, you get rid of people you do not trust. For the year or so prior to MON leaving, there were repeated attempts to get him to sort the wage bill out a bit with assurances made that this would be done. It came to a head last August when RL held the line on opening the coffers *until* the wage bill was sorted. Transfer money is NOT the issue; it is all about getting the club's finances sustainable. He is unwilling to lose 20 million a year, simple as. I happen to agree with those who say that stricter controls should have been placed on MON, but I think paulie had it right that there was reliance on the reputation of MON *and* that his ability to get the club in striking distance of the CL was tantalizing enough to take risks in the hopes that it would pay off. That did not work, so there is a desire, I think, to adopt another approach that does not see him pissing money down the drain. The long-term goal remains to compete for CL spots (and do not moan at me about the realism, or lack thereof, of this in the current structure, as I have nothing to do with it), but clearly it will be done with a combination of youth and experience. My $.02.
Pelty thanks UTV
-
On the size of wage, we need to follow Tottenham's line. They have a strict wages policy and look abroad for players likely to take lower wages.
That's how they get Modric on 40k a week and we throw 65k a week at Emile.
I have no issue with wage control, in fact I have banged on about it for ages, the money we were wasting. My issue is entirely with the speed and depth of the cuts, as I feel we are really risking throwing away a lot of the progress of recent years.
-
Can't speak for Pelty but reading that, I'd take the certain obligations to mean the shifting of the likes oh Heskey and Beye.
This two are costing us approx 5.5m a year between them. That's a big chunk of wage bill.
That is a start. Like most of the posts I read here, I personally would like to see things done a bit more methodically, but then, it is not my 20 million, so it is easy to take such a stance. As stated above, if the wage bill gets right, then transfer money is available; this I know to be true. Until revenues push up in such a way that it is allowed, however, I doubt we will see wages of the sort seen at City or even in the MON days (except on select players). This last bit is my opinion, not an ITK in any way...
And that is the way it should be!
In some ways we have been spoilt by the spending of previous years. I think a lot of my frustration comes from the lack of communication. Star players sold, We don't know what the 'plan' is, is Randy still in it for the long haul?
All of this gets coupled with the General being busy with other commitments and the dissatisfaction spreads. We do need to be better at communication especially when selling star players. As fans want to know the direction and aspirations of the club.
Cheers Pelty.
-
Pelty - just a bit of clarification on The General's thread. We merged it into one thread as he asked us to ages ago. It was then locked for a while, I think while the furore over McLeish died down. He then contacted Dave asking for it to be reopened, which we duly did. For whatever reason, he then didn't post, and hasn't to my knowledge, been in touch with either Mac, martin or Dave. We do of course all realise that with his new position at the university his time would be limited, but he still seemed to post on Villatalk and Vitalvilla at weekends, although even that seems to have stopped now.
-
Is this turning into "Pelty's Thread - The Generals Apprentice" only joking Pelty! Haha
-
Pelty - just a bit of clarification on The General's thread. We merged it into one thread as he asked us to ages ago. It was then locked for a while, I think while the furore over McLeish died down. He then contacted Dave asking for it to be reopened, which we duly did. For whatever reason, he then didn't post, and hasn't to my knowledge, been in touch with either Mac, martin or Dave. We do of course all realise that with his new position at the university his time would be limited, but he still seemed to post on Villatalk and Vitalvilla at weekends, although even that seems to have stopped now.
OK, Risso. I will check on this, but maybe some communication from one of you may be helpful to sort this out rather than having me serve as a middleman. Not trying to make excuses as we are all busy, but the new job has an extremely trying set of circumstances that are requiring his full attention and he may have not understood that you merged the thread, etc. I am only guessing on this as we have not gotten into the details...
-
Is this turning into "Pelty's Thread - The Generals Apprentice" only joking Pelty! Haha
Ha! I will shut up soon as I really have no desire to be some sort of "Know-it-all" (which I am not as my knowledge is quite limited) or anything like that, but I did want to try to clarify aspects of this situation a bit because I have seen some claim that the wage relief experienced this summer should do the job and now RL is merely being a cheapskate, but the reality is that even with all the sales, there is still a shortfall (and, again, I agree with Paulie that the rapidity with which the sales are being made seems dangerous and, since it is not my money, I do not agree with it, but if it were my money, I imagine I would make Doug look like the the Reformed Scrooge on Christmas Morn).
-
Is this turning into "Pelty's Thread - The Generals Apprentice" only joking Pelty! Haha
Ha! I will shut up soon as I really have no desire to be some sort of "Know-it-all" (which I am not) or anything like that, but I dis want to try to clarify aspects of this situation a bit because I have seen some claim that the wage relief experienced this summer should do the job and now RL is merely being a cheapskate, but the reality is that even with all the sales, there is still a shortfall (and, again, I agree with Paulie that the manner in which it is being done seems dangerous and since it is not my money, I do not agree with it, but if it were my money, I would make Doug look like the the Reformed Scrooge on Christmas Morn).
Pelty, one thing before you do shut up....Can you confirm Randy is still passionate and in it for the long-haul?
-
Perhaps another of the obligations was Cuellar. He's clearly surplus to requirements but seeming in no hurry to move, happy to spend another year picking uphis money and going on the piss in the Mailbox. Then again he's a fans favourite and no criticism s allowed while Heskey, who every manager and caretaker has used, gets the piss ripped out of him.
-
Perhaps another of the obligations was Cuellar. He's clearly surplus to requirements but seeming in no hurry to move, happy to spend another year picking uphis money and going on the piss in the Mailbox. Then again he's a fans favourite and no criticism s allowed while Heskey, who every manager and caretaker has used, gets the piss ripped out of him.
Fair comment I'd say.
-
Pelty - just a bit of clarification on The General's thread. We merged it into one thread as he asked us to ages ago. It was then locked for a while, I think while the furore over McLeish died down. He then contacted Dave asking for it to be reopened, which we duly did. For whatever reason, he then didn't post, and hasn't to my knowledge, been in touch with either Mac, martin or Dave. We do of course all realise that with his new position at the university his time would be limited, but he still seemed to post on Villatalk and Vitalvilla at weekends, although even that seems to have stopped now.
OK, Risso. I will check on this, but maybe some communication from one of you may be helpful to sort this out rather than having me serve as a middleman. Not trying to make excuses as we are all busy, but the new job has an extremely trying set of circumstances that are requiring his full attention and he may have not understood that you merged the thread, etc. I am only guessing on this as we have not gotten into the details...
No problem, and my comments were not intended to imply on any criticism of the General for what it's worth. I'm sure he's got his hands full, which is why I'm surprised that he wanted to come back in the first place. My personal opinion is the same as Paulie's, ie that the thread has long since past being of much practical use, and is now mainly a cause of friction, contrary to its original intention.
Rather than a formal thread, I'd rather the General just came on to the odd match thread and gave his fan's opinion, much like you're doing now. It'd be far less likely to end up being misquoted in the press, and would allow him to post as when he had time, rather than have people tapping their feet and accusing him of "bottling it". Again, just my view.
-
It was the mooted sale of Cuellar which really got the alarm bells ringing with me: yes, we would sell him but not bring in a direct replacement, instead (it has been reported so perhaps just speculation) using his saved wages to bring in a free transfer midfielder. The realisation that we're dealing within these restrictions was pretty sobering.
I agree with the point about Heskey. He's been more or less a regular whenever fit, and had a decent season last season. Started on Saturday and throughout pre-season so clearly in the manager's plans.
-
And that is the way it should be!
In some ways we have been spoilt by the spending of previous years. I think a lot of my frustration comes from the lack of communication. Star players sold, We don't know what the 'plan' is, is Randy still in it for the long haul?
All of this gets coupled with the General being busy with other commitments and the dissatisfaction spreads. We do need to be better at communication especially when selling star players. As fans want to know the direction and aspirations of the club.
Cheers Pelty.
Not trying to be cheeky with this as you have far more exposure to these things than me; do most clubs speak to these sorts of questions? Has Arsenal spoken to the sale of Fabregas and the direction of the club, for example? How regularly are such "state of the union" communications made? To a degree (though to an apparently unsatisfactory one), I think that was what the letter to the season ticket holders was meant to do, i.e., to be a reasoned, rational, "grown-up" approach to where the club sits at the present time. Granted, it was heavy on the finances, but I think that should say something to the fans about how some things have grown out of control and need to be reined in (and, again, RL is not without fault in this, but his modus generally has been to try to allow his managers/coaches (NFL) get on with things without feeling like RL is peering over their shoulders... maybe he is learning that he does need to be hands-on a bit more, I do not know). Again, I am speculating, so take it for what it cost you.
-
Perhaps another of the obligations was Cuellar. He's clearly surplus to requirements but seeming in no hurry to move, happy to spend another year picking uphis money and going on the piss in the Mailbox. Then again he's a fans favourite and no criticism s allowed while Heskey, who every manager and caretaker has used, gets the piss ripped out of him.
Difference being Carlos when asked to play in his position did his job with distinction whilst Heskey scored how many goals?Although I suppose Heskey was a "defensive forward" which is latin for cannot hit a pigs arse with a banjo.
-
Pelty, one thing before you do shut up....Can you confirm Randy is still passionate and in it for the long-haul?
It probably depends on what day you ask him! He loves the club, but to say that the last year-plus has been frustrating is probably an understatement. I will say this, he really loves the Villa and has always tried to do what he thought best for the club. He has made mistakes, but I think he has done many things right, too, so for me personally, I am sad that he comes in for a load of abuse; it is a part of being an owner -- I get that -- but it is tough to see someone who has put much of his time and capital on the line get hammered by some of the fans.
-
To me the letter was just as you described it, Pelty, treating fans as grown ups, setting out the parameters in which we are currently operating. As a group though we're in the habit of dissecting everything to the nth degree so people not only took it for what it did say but also what it didn't.
-
And that is the way it should be!
In some ways we have been spoilt by the spending of previous years. I think a lot of my frustration comes from the lack of communication. Star players sold, We don't know what the 'plan' is, is Randy still in it for the long haul?
All of this gets coupled with the General being busy with other commitments and the dissatisfaction spreads. We do need to be better at communication especially when selling star players. As fans want to know the direction and aspirations of the club.
Cheers Pelty.
Not trying to be cheeky with this as you have far more exposure to these things than me; do most clubs speak to these sorts of questions? Has Arsenal spoken to the sale of Fabregas and the direction of the club, for example? How regularly are such "state of the union" communications made? To a degree (though to an apparently unsatisfactory one), I think that was what the letter to the season ticket holders was meant to do, i.e., to be a reasoned, rational, "grown-up" approach to where the club sits at the present time. Granted, it was heavy on the finances, but I think that should say something to the fans about how some things have grown out of control and need to be reined in (and, again, RL is not without fault in this, but his modus generally has been to try to allow his managers/coaches (NFL) get on with things without feeling like RL is peering over their shoulders... maybe he is learning that he does need to be hands-on a bit more, I do not know). Again, I am speculating, so take it for what it cost you.
Pelty, I am not having a go either, but where was Randy's end of Season sit down with website & written press?
That letter, as you say was big on financials, but not much on the aims, ie challenging for Europe or Champions League or even a season of transition. The only aim was to be in Deloittes Top 20 richest clubs
Both Gazidis and Buck (Chelsea) go on the radio regularly and talk. Levy and Tottenham has said no publicly about Modric (so far that seems to work) and taled of their ambitions. Liverpools owner has talked on Twitter about their direction and ambition.
Because we hear so little now from the General (understandably) it starts to get worrying as he was the mouthpiece of Randy to the fans. Maybe Paul Faulkner needs to take that on.
As I say when you put it all together, it is understandable that Villa fans are unsure of the direction of the club. Pelty, I am not having a go at you, as you have given us more insight that I have seen in months.
I just want to know if Randy is still in it for the long haul.
-
Risso...
"My personal opinion is the same as Paulie's, ie that the thread has long since past being of much practical use, and is now mainly a cause of friction, contrary to its original intention."
I tend to agree, but he feels a sense of loyalty to the fans and does not want to let them down, but I think that the demands of the job eventually may lead to the sort of irregular presence you are suggesting (indeed, we have seen that to be the case already).
-
Perhaps another of the obligations was Cuellar. He's clearly surplus to requirements but seeming in no hurry to move, happy to spend another year picking uphis money and going on the piss in the Mailbox. Then again he's a fans favourite and no criticism s allowed while Heskey, who every manager and caretaker has used, gets the piss ripped out of him.
Difference being Carlos when asked to play in his position did his job with distinction whilst Heskey scored how many goals?Although I suppose Heskey was a "defensive forward" which is latin for cannot hit a pigs arse with a banjo.
Yet none of our managers or caretakers has picked Cuellar regularly at centre half while Heskey has been a mainstay for all of them. Are you conceited enough to say that they are all wrong?
-
Perhaps another of the obligations was Cuellar. He's clearly surplus to requirements but seeming in no hurry to move, happy to spend another year picking uphis money and going on the piss in the Mailbox. Then again he's a fans favourite and no criticism s allowed while Heskey, who every manager and caretaker has used, gets the piss ripped out of him.
Fair comment I'd say.
He's a fans favourite because he's a decent player.
I have no beef with Heskey coining it in for one year. If I were him, I wouldn't be going anywhere either.
The reason he gets stick, though, is because he's not very good.
-
Pelty, one thing before you do shut up....Can you confirm Randy is still passionate and in it for the long-haul?
It probably depends on what day you ask him! He loves the club, but to say that the last year-plus has been frustrating is probably an understatement. I will say this, he really loves the Villa and has always tried to do what he thought best for the club. He has made mistakes, but I think he has done many things right, too, so for me personally, I am sad that he comes in for a load of abuse; it is a part of being an owner -- I get that -- but it is tough to see someone who has put much of his time and capital on the line get hammered by some of the fans.
Was that a yes or a no?
Cheers Pelty. Honestly really appreciate your comments.
-
Not trying to be cheeky with this as you have far more exposure to these things than me; do most clubs speak to these sorts of questions?
Without checking every PL club's fan forums, I'd be very surprised if any of them have a board member interacting with fans as GK has done for the last few years. So we've had a bit of an unprecedented insight there, absolutely, which has been appreciated, I'd say. I guess the difficulty comes when things get tougher, as events over the last 12 months have, and fans perhaps expect more candid discussions with that board member; as I said earlier, I really don't think anyone who has a close relationship with the club can be expected to be 100% frank at all times. Which is why I think it's right that GK's thread has been inactive for a time.
Having said that, I think what many/most other PL owners do is undertake the odd interview, talk to fans via the press, etc. So we've probably been advantaged in one respect and disadvantaged in the other.
Thanks for coming on today, Pelty.
-
Perhaps another of the obligations was Cuellar. He's clearly surplus to requirements but seeming in no hurry to move, happy to spend another year picking uphis money and going on the piss in the Mailbox. Then again he's a fans favourite and no criticism s allowed while Heskey, who every manager and caretaker has used, gets the piss ripped out of him.
Fair comment I'd say.
He's a fans favourite because he's a decent player.
I have no beef with Heskey coining it in for one year. If I were him, I wouldn't be going anywhere either.
The reason he gets stick, though, is because he's not very good.
See post above.
-
Pelty, one thing before you do shut up....Can you confirm Randy is still passionate and in it for the long-haul?
It probably depends on what day you ask him! He loves the club, but to say that the last year-plus has been frustrating is probably an understatement. I will say this, he really loves the Villa and has always tried to do what he thought best for the club. He has made mistakes, but I think he has done many things right, too, so for me personally, I am sad that he comes in for a load of abuse; it is a part of being an owner -- I get that -- but it is tough to see someone who has put much of his time and capital on the line get hammered by some of the fans.
I think you get this whenever you are in the public eye, people get built up just to get knocked back down, this is especially bad in this country. I am not sure how many clubs across the country use message boards as a way of communicating with the fans. Due to this like the 24 hour news cycle any piece of information however small is discussed for hours on end.
So as you have said yourself Randy has made some mistakes, this will be acceptable to some people and to others it will be unforgiveable. I think that the overwhelming majority of fans want what is best for the club to make us successful, different people have different ways of expressing this opinion.
I think most support the things that Randy has done for the club, and some are now questioning his judgement in certain situations.
The complete backing and trust of O'Neill when the wages and costs where spiralling out of control.
The last 12 months since O'Neill left with the merry go round of managerial appointments ending up with Alex McLeish from of all clubs the Blues.
The pulling back of the spending from the early years putting the complete breaks on it and ending up with minimal outlay after losing 12 players in the summer.
The truth is it is Randy's money and he is the majority shareholder at the club, so like Doug before him the buck stops with him and ultimately he will succeed or fail by the decisions he makes. I really hope he is making the right decision for the long term success of the football club.
Only time will tell.
-
irreverent...
"I am not having a go either, but where was Randy's end of Season sit down with website & written press?"
I am sorry, but I do not know.
"That letter, as you say was big on financials, but not much on the aims, ie challenging for Europe or Champions League or even a season of transition. The only aim was to be in Deloittes Top 20 richest clubs"
Was that last really stated? I must have missed that! Anyway, if that was stated, I think that is a laudable goal *as long* as it allows for on-pitch success. I do know that there is a desire to win, but it will be done in a fiscally-responsible way. The reality is that RL is not a sheikh and does not have years of CL success and the monies therefrom to reply upon and could not sustain the huge expenditures of the first few years *without* CL football. To be fair, he was not too far away from the gamble paying off, but sixth place was the best we could do those years. The entry of City into the fray probably aided in making evident the need for recalibration.
"Both Gazidis and Buck (Chelsea) go on the radio regularly and talk. Levy and Tottenham has said no publicly about Modric (so far that seems to work) and taled of their ambitions. Liverpools owner has talked on Twitter about their direction and ambition."
Fair enough. Like you say, if the General's presence becomes diminished, then someone else will need to step up. That should be interesting...
-
Perhaps another of the obligations was Cuellar. He's clearly surplus to requirements but seeming in no hurry to move, happy to spend another year picking uphis money and going on the piss in the Mailbox. Then again he's a fans favourite and no criticism s allowed while Heskey, who every manager and caretaker has used, gets the piss ripped out of him.
Fair comment I'd say.
He's a fans favourite because he's a decent player.
I have no beef with Heskey coining it in for one year. If I were him, I wouldn't be going anywhere either.
The reason he gets stick, though, is because he's not very good.
See post above.
Sorry Chris but Heskey has had about 5 good games for us since he's been here and those were under Houllier. Whilst I appreciate his effort and he did put in a shift on Saturday, he's the type of player we should have taken on loan for 6 months rather than giving him a three and a half year contract on stupid money. And no it's not hindsight, it was bloody obvious to almost all at the time.
-
irreverent...
"I am not having a go either, but where was Randy's end of Season sit down with website & written press?"
I am sorry, but I do not know.
"That letter, as you say was big on financials, but not much on the aims, ie challenging for Europe or Champions League or even a season of transition. The only aim was to be in Deloittes Top 20 richest clubs"
Was that last really stated? I must have missed that! Anyway, if that was stated, I think that is a laudable goal *as long* as it allows for on-pitch success. I do know that there is a desire to win, but it will be done in a fiscally-responsible way. The reality is that RL is not a sheikh and does not have years of CL success and the monies therefrom to reply upon and could not sustain the huge expenditures of the first few years *without* CL football. To be fair, he was not too far away from the gamble paying off, but sixth place was the best we could do those years. The entry of City into the fray probably aided in making evident the need for recalibration.
"Both Gazidis and Buck (Chelsea) go on the radio regularly and talk. Levy and Tottenham has said no publicly about Modric (so far that seems to work) and taled of their ambitions. Liverpools owner has talked on Twitter about their direction and ambition."
Fair enough. Like you say, if the General's presence becomes diminished, then someone else will need to step up. That should be interesting...
Don't get me wrong, I am not a guy who cares whether we spend millions on players. I just want to feel part of a club where we are all in it together. I think Randy has been and is a fantastic owner for the football club. He has proved this. I just want to see his enthusiasm for the club.
Not by spending money, but by rallying everyone (himself or delegating) or tell us we will take 1 step back to go 2 steps forward.
I am just worried, his passion for villa is declining and he wants out.
-
Pelty, one thing before you do shut up....Can you confirm Randy is still passionate and in it for the long-haul?
It probably depends on what day you ask him! He loves the club, but to say that the last year-plus has been frustrating is probably an understatement. I will say this, he really loves the Villa and has always tried to do what he thought best for the club. He has made mistakes, but I think he has done many things right, too, so for me personally, I am sad that he comes in for a load of abuse; it is a part of being an owner -- I get that -- but it is tough to see someone who has put much of his time and capital on the line get hammered by some of the fans.
Was that a yes or a no?
Cheers Pelty. Honestly really appreciate your comments.
Sorry to let my emotional statement obscure the answer: yes, I think he is passionate, but it is a passion coloured, too, by frustration at some roadblocks and failures encountered along the way.
-
Perhaps another of the obligations was Cuellar. He's clearly surplus to requirements but seeming in no hurry to move, happy to spend another year picking uphis money and going on the piss in the Mailbox. Then again he's a fans favourite and no criticism s allowed while Heskey, who every manager and caretaker has used, gets the piss ripped out of him.
Difference being Carlos when asked to play in his position did his job with distinction whilst Heskey scored how many goals?Although I suppose Heskey was a "defensive forward" which is latin for cannot hit a pigs arse with a banjo.
Yet none of our managers or caretakers has picked Cuellar regularly at centre half while Heskey has been a mainstay for all of them. Are you conceited enough to say that they are all wrong?
Heskey does a job whilst playing a limited style of football that should and has long died out except in Stoke.Carlos was very unlucky not to get picked and i get the feeling it was easier to drop him rather than Dunne and Collins especially last year.
-
Pelty
I have been very critical of Lerner, and whether you take my ramblings as the utterances of a mad man or not, if there's one thing that needs passing onto the club it's this:
Sort the PR out.
That letter to season ticket holders as an example was abysmal. It was devoid of any sort of footballing hope whatsoever, and if it had been sent out prior to season tickets being renewed could well have put a lot of people off. If the club are going to increase non Sky income, they really need to be far better at all methods of income generation. Not that of course, I am an expert in football administration by any means. ;)
-
Don't get me wrong, I am not a guy who cares whether we spend millions on players. I just want to feel part of a club where we are all in it together. I think Randy has been and is a fantastic owner for the football club. He has proved this. I just want to see his enthusiasm for the club.
Not by spending money, but by rallying everyone (himself or delegating) or tell us we will take 1 step back to go 2 steps forward.
I am just worried, his passion for villa is declining and he wants out.
I hope I have answered this... one addition, I just do not think he is the out-in-front "rah-rah" type, so the rallying must be done by someone else. That sort of thing just is not in his DNA; thus the need for someone like the general or whoever. I agree with that...
-
irreverent...
"I am not having a go either, but where was Randy's end of Season sit down with website & written press?"
I am sorry, but I do not know.
"That letter, as you say was big on financials, but not much on the aims, ie challenging for Europe or Champions League or even a season of transition. The only aim was to be in Deloittes Top 20 richest clubs"
Was that last really stated? I must have missed that! Anyway, if that was stated, I think that is a laudable goal *as long* as it allows for on-pitch success. I do know that there is a desire to win, but it will be done in a fiscally-responsible way. The reality is that RL is not a sheikh and does not have years of CL success and the monies therefrom to reply upon and could not sustain the huge expenditures of the first few years *without* CL football. To be fair, he was not too far away from the gamble paying off, but sixth place was the best we could do those years. The entry of City into the fray probably aided in making evident the need for recalibration.
"Both Gazidis and Buck (Chelsea) go on the radio regularly and talk. Levy and Tottenham has said no publicly about Modric (so far that seems to work) and taled of their ambitions. Liverpools owner has talked on Twitter about their direction and ambition."
Fair enough. Like you say, if the General's presence becomes diminished, then someone else will need to step up. That should be interesting...
Just on the letter mate:
"As regards our personal ambitions for the Club they remain as they've been from the beginning: to manage the club for growth. More precisely, our focus is to manage the investments we've made at Villa Park to promote strong financial performance in terms of our commercial activities in order that the Clubs revenue can grow and contribute accordingly to player, manager and other football related wages and costs. This approach is at the core of our broader strategy yo create an enduring business model that is stable and yet has the potential to grow, as we feel that the club revenue and player wages are the key to consistent competitiveness. In connection with this strategy, we have targeted being at or within range of a top 20 ranking among clubs in Europe by revenue, which was achieved in the last Deloitte Football report"
It was just a bit cold, I think he could have really rallied everyone. But hey ho, as I said I think Randy is great. I am just disappointed he missed this oppotunity to pull everyone together.
-
Don't get me wrong, I am not a guy who cares whether we spend millions on players. I just want to feel part of a club where we are all in it together. I think Randy has been and is a fantastic owner for the football club. He has proved this. I just want to see his enthusiasm for the club.
Not by spending money, but by rallying everyone (himself or delegating) or tell us we will take 1 step back to go 2 steps forward.
I am just worried, his passion for villa is declining and he wants out.
I hope I have answered this... one addition, I just do not think he is the out-in-front "rah-rah" type, so the rallying must be done by someone else. That sort of thing just is not in his DNA; thus the need for someone like the general or whoever. I agree with that...
You did pal. I just wanted to expand. Cheers.
The 'Randy is here for the long-term bit' you missed, but I do agree with what you have said.
-
Pelty
I have been very critical of Lerner, and whether you take my ramblings as the utterances of a mad man or not, if there's one thing that needs passing onto the club it's this:
Sort the PR out.
That letter to season ticket holders as an example was abysmal. It was devoid of any sort of footballing hope whatsoever, and if it had been sent out prior to season tickets being renewed could well have put a lot of people off. If the club are going to increase non Sky income, they really need to be far better at all methods of income generation. Not that of course, I am an expert in football administration by any means. ;)
You are preaching to the choir, believe me. BELIEVE ME! I can offer no hope, I am afraid to say... but, again, I have no role in it at all, just a slightly closer vantage point. In your position here on H&V, you probably have more access than me to people that matter, so sort it out!
-
Cuellar is the latest in a long line of players who get better the longer they are out of the team. He's decent and occasionally very good but has mostly performed better for us at right back than centre half. I think he's fine when he's got an organiser alongside him but doesn't appear able to take on that role himself and, for a centre back at the top level, that's a fatal flaw.
I know few will agree with me but it's Rangers after him, not another PL side.
-
irreverent...
"I am not having a go either, but where was Randy's end of Season sit down with website & written press?"
I am sorry, but I do not know.
"That letter, as you say was big on financials, but not much on the aims, ie challenging for Europe or Champions League or even a season of transition. The only aim was to be in Deloittes Top 20 richest clubs"
Was that last really stated? I must have missed that! Anyway, if that was stated, I think that is a laudable goal *as long* as it allows for on-pitch success. I do know that there is a desire to win, but it will be done in a fiscally-responsible way. The reality is that RL is not a sheikh and does not have years of CL success and the monies therefrom to reply upon and could not sustain the huge expenditures of the first few years *without* CL football. To be fair, he was not too far away from the gamble paying off, but sixth place was the best we could do those years. The entry of City into the fray probably aided in making evident the need for recalibration.
"Both Gazidis and Buck (Chelsea) go on the radio regularly and talk. Levy and Tottenham has said no publicly about Modric (so far that seems to work) and taled of their ambitions. Liverpools owner has talked on Twitter about their direction and ambition."
Fair enough. Like you say, if the General's presence becomes diminished, then someone else will need to step up. That should be interesting...
Just on the letter mate:
"As regards our personal ambitions for the Club they remain as they've been from the beginning: to manage the club for growth. More precisely, our focus is to manage the investments we've made at Villa Park to promote strong financial performance in terms of our commercial activities in order that the Clubs revenue can grow and contribute accordingly to player, manager and other football related wages and costs. This approach is at the core of our broader strategy yo create an enduring business model that is stable and yet has the potential to grow, as we feel that the club revenue and player wages are the key to consistent competitiveness. In connection with this strategy, we have targeted being at or within range of a top 20 ranking among clubs in Europe by revenue, which was achieved in the last Deloitte Football report"
It was just a bit cold, I think he could have really rallied everyone. But hey ho, as I said I think Randy is great. I am just disappointed he missed this oppotunity to pull everyone together.
Ha, I missed that. I have no explanation and agree that it does not get me very excited. I would have wished for more if I were a recipient of one of those letters.
-
The 'Randy is here for the long-term bit' you missed, but I do agree with what you have said.
I do not know, but I have not heard otherwise... again, for whatever that is worth.
-
Sorry to occupy the thread for so long...
Let's hope we get a win this weekend and see some good football... and a different lineup! :-)
-
Pelty, one thing before you do shut up....Can you confirm Randy is still passionate and in it for the long-haul?
It probably depends on what day you ask him! He loves the club, but to say that the last year-plus has been frustrating is probably an understatement. I will say this, he really loves the Villa and has always tried to do what he thought best for the club. He has made mistakes, but I think he has done many things right, too, so for me personally, I am sad that he comes in for a load of abuse; it is a part of being an owner -- I get that -- but it is tough to see someone who has put much of his time and capital on the line get hammered by some of the fans.
Was that a yes or a no?
Cheers Pelty. Honestly really appreciate your comments.
Sorry to let my emotional statement obscure the answer: yes, I think he is passionate, but it is a passion coloured, too, by frustration at some roadblocks and failures encountered along the way.
The last comment describes most of us I think. Enjoying a decent debate at least.
-
Pelty. It is always good to get feedback from people who are more in touch. Really appreciate it.
-
Perhaps another of the obligations was Cuellar. He's clearly surplus to requirements but seeming in no hurry to move, happy to spend another year picking uphis money and going on the piss in the Mailbox. Then again he's a fans favourite and no criticism s allowed while Heskey, who every manager and caretaker has used, gets the piss ripped out of him.
I'm surprised by this comment off you Chris if i'm honest. I'm pretty sure you used to stand up for MON's team selections, when many on here complained about 'square pegs in round holes'. Cuellar was one of those 'square pegs' when he played out of position in a very good defence that did'nt concede many.
Don't lambast him because he dose'nt want to take a pay cut and join Rangers. He's not pissing us about, Downing pissed us about.
-
Pelty
I have been very critical of Lerner, and whether you take my ramblings as the utterances of a mad man or not, if there's one thing that needs passing onto the club it's this:
Sort the PR out.
That letter to season ticket holders as an example was abysmal. It was devoid of any sort of footballing hope whatsoever, and if it had been sent out prior to season tickets being renewed could well have put a lot of people off. If the club are going to increase non Sky income, they really need to be far better at all methods of income generation. Not that of course, I am an expert in football administration by any means. ;)
And might I suggest getting a "football man" on the board. I know that at the end of the day it's Randy's call, but I'm uncomfortable with the tactic (or at least it appears that way) of asking other managers, such as Ferguson, their opinion on potential candidates etc. There's a dangerous conflict of interests there.
-
Some very good points. I have never felt so indifferent towards my beloved club as I do now. I watched yesterday and all I could think was " God theres another 9 months of this"
I don't get this bit. Maybe I'm misinterpreting it but I could never feel indifferent to our club.
Indifferent to the Owner, the Board and their policies ( or what we believe are their policies), maybe but not towards our club.
If I'm misreading what you're saying, then apologies.
i think a lot of people feel the same, thats why attendancies vary
Fair enough. I only get to 1 game a season. That doesn't fluctuate. Maybe if I was in a position to attend more often then I would hum and haw about attending depending on how things are going.
I m really not sure which of the above two points is how I feel!! I guess Ger you are right, its is the owner/policies that I feel indifferent to. I will always Love the club as I m sure everyone on here will. I have genuinely been a Randy supporter for the last 5 years and I think he has done a lot for the club. But now its just indifference towards him. I didnt want Mcleish but now he is here want him to do well but again I just feel..well ..indifferent.
I gave up my season ticket just over a year ago because although MON got us 6th which now seems unlikely, I couldnt go another year watching what was in my opinion dull predictable football ( we even used to have bets on what time the predictable subs would come on)
So my enthusiasm has waned since then really. Last season didnt help and although Randy has undoubtedly spent a lot of money, it seems that there is just none there now and I cant get excited about my beloved club.
-
Sod the PR. Sort the defence out. I know we had a clean sheet on Saturday but it won't last with what we have. McLeish said he wants a midfield general, i would say its absolutely critical to our season. Surely we have offloaded enough to get 1 more in.
-
Perhaps another of the obligations was Cuellar. He's clearly surplus to requirements but seeming in no hurry to move, happy to spend another year picking uphis money and going on the piss in the Mailbox. Then again he's a fans favourite and no criticism s allowed while Heskey, who every manager and caretaker has used, gets the piss ripped out of him.
I'm surprised by this comment off you Chris if i'm honest. I'm pretty sure you used to stand up for MON's team selections, when many on here complained about 'square pegs in round holes'. Cuellar was one of those 'square pegs' when he played out of position in a very good defence that did'nt concede many.
Don't lambast him because he dose'nt want to take a pay cut and join Rangers. He's not pissing us about, Downing pissed us about.
Clampy, I've explained myself a bit more fully further on in the thread. It's not that I think he's rubbish, far from it, but I was just using him as a contrast to the crap Heskey gets despite every manager he's worked under finding room for him in their sides.
Cuellar is in the last year of his contract, it's in our interests to sell him and his to move to get a game yet he's still here. That does piss me off a bit.
-
To be fair to Cuellar, his injury may not help. Unlike, Coin It In, Beye.
Cheers for the insight Pelty. I don't have an issue with Randy pulling back on expenditure, its the apparent indecent haste that rankles with me.
It is one thing to appoint an unpopular choice like McLeish but to hang him out to dry with how little we have reinforced the squad seems very unfair to me.
We have a saying over here that you, don't throw the baby out with the bath water, and I have a horrible feeling that this is where things are going with how quick we are cutting.
If we get half the injuries we had last year with the current squad we are in the cart for another long and less than enjoyable season.
-
Despite my scepticism of Randy's financing of the investments in Villa (loan notes at LIBOR + 2%, management fees), I feel sorry for him after reading the flak on this and many other threads. We should remember those who have failed him:
a) footballing side of things - MoN (well documented failings on other threads)
b) revenue growth - IMG sports (whatever happened to them?)
c) Fitzgerald (what did he do?)
in addition he enlisted Populous to advise on the stadium development. Even with hindsight, none of us could claim that we would have made better choices in recruitment.
-
Perhaps another of the obligations was Cuellar. He's clearly surplus to requirements but seeming in no hurry to move, happy to spend another year picking uphis money and going on the piss in the Mailbox. Then again he's a fans favourite and no criticism s allowed while Heskey, who every manager and caretaker has used, gets the piss ripped out of him.
I'm surprised by this comment off you Chris if i'm honest. I'm pretty sure you used to stand up for MON's team selections, when many on here complained about 'square pegs in round holes'. Cuellar was one of those 'square pegs' when he played out of position in a very good defence that did'nt concede many.
Don't lambast him because he dose'nt want to take a pay cut and join Rangers. He's not pissing us about, Downing pissed us about.
Clampy, I've explained myself a bit more fully further on in the thread. It's not that I think he's rubbish, far from it, but I was just using him as a contrast to the crap Heskey gets despite every manager he's worked under finding room for him in their sides.
Cuellar is in the last year of his contract, it's in our interests to sell him and his to move to get a game yet he's still here. That does piss me off a bit.
Heskey had more than enough chances to prove himself and how many good games and goals did he have?
It may be conceited but I have this crazy notion that strikers should score goals or at the very least contribute through assists.
Cuellar on the other hand was limited in his chances and always defended stoically.He may well have been a limited player distributing the ball but no more so than Collins.
-
If we are still going to make a loss, despite getting a significant sum off the wage bill over the last 18 months, (Carew, Sidwell, NRC, YOung, Milner, Downing, Friedel, Ireland for 6 months of the season, Salifou, others I am sure) with less players coming in on possibly less money in some instances, then we are in big, big trouble. Assuming we pull in around 80 million or so, plus 25 million plus PROFIT in transfer fees on top, then what the hell is the money going on! What the hell are we paying people, and who on earth are we employing behind the scenes, and finally how much is Randy taking out of it all? Just all a bit mad.
-
Cheers for the insight Pelty. I don't have an issue with Randy pulling back on expenditure, its the apparent indecent haste that rankles with me.
It is one thing to appoint an unpopular choice like McLeish but to hang him out to dry with how little we have reinforced the squad seems very unfair to me.
We have a saying over here that you, don't throw the baby out with the bath water, and I have a horrible feeling that this is where things are going with how quick we are cutting.
If we get half the injuries we had last year with the current squad we are in the cart for another long and less than enjoyable season.
I find nothing to disagree with here. I am very concerned about this, too...
-
Cheers for the insight Pelty. I don't have an issue with Randy pulling back on expenditure, its the apparent indecent haste that rankles with me.
It is one thing to appoint an unpopular choice like McLeish but to hang him out to dry with how little we have reinforced the squad seems very unfair to me.
We have a saying over here that you, don't throw the baby out with the bath water, and I have a horrible feeling that this is where things are going with how quick we are cutting.
If we get half the injuries we had last year with the current squad we are in the cart for another long and less than enjoyable season.
I find nothing to disagree with here. I am very concerned about this, too...
Well thanks for cheering us all up, Pelty! :-(
-
If there is money available for transfer fees, why can't part of this be used to fund players wages?
For example (and I really am plucking these figures from thin air).
104 weeks @ £20k/week = £2,080,000
Add in a signing on fee and bonuses then you're probably looking at £3.5m
I'm pretty sure there will be more than that available as a transfer fee.
-
Well thanks for cheering us all up, Pelty! :-(
Sorry! Not trying to be a downer, but it is a dangerous game being played, I think (I am not alone in this, obviously). Again, it is easy to say when it is not my money and I have not already sunk a bunch of capital into the club...
-
Do you ever wish that you could go back to being a youngster again, only knowing what you know now? Well I wish we could rewind five years with Randy knowing what he knows now. Imagine not buying Curtis Davies, Marlon Harewood, Emile Heskey and all the other players that have taken a fortune out of the club for little return. I know that hindsight is a wonderful thing, but you have to wonder at the combination of circumstances that led to Lerner agreeing to the Beye deal. The biggest puzzle for me though is how on earth O'Neill managed to win any sort of tribunal. All Randy needed to do surely was slap the Beye contract down on the table, and turn on his heels and walk out.
-
As you may have noticed with my articles in the fanzine, and we have some mutual friends I might add, I have always defended the board and in particular what your old fella says. I get the feeling he has been sold a pup of late.
I have met him a few times and know he is an honourable guy. Let's see how it plays out but it might be worth a word with Randy at the next family BBQ about having a few bob up his sleeve come January wherever we sit in the table!
Particularly looking at the horrific run of games in December we have that leads into it.
-
The biggest puzzle for me though is how on earth O'Neill managed to win any sort of tribunal. All Randy needed to do surely was slap the Beye contract down on the table, and turn on his heels and walk out.
Tribunals don't work like that though. It only needs one process not complied with, and the complainant's dismissal will automatically be judged to be unfair.
-
It is an incredible world. Teh obligations must be managerial and staff pay outs at various levels, but the amount has never been disclosed, but for them to have such a large sway on the competitive nature of the team on the pitch (2-3 players from being a very decent side still) then it would appear the process being deemed unfair has resulted in a larger pay off than we thought or feared. Only in football.
-
To be fair I have been chief prosecution witness for us when you would like nothing more than to manfully beat your cock round the head of an opposition briefs head to try and knock some sense into them. Tribunals don't work like that.
-
I know they don't. I wasn't being entirely serious......
-
MON won the case, no doubt or a technical knock out at least.
he would have been prepared to go public on what happened but he got a pay off instead.
The saying that when a man with experience meets a man with money, the man with money gets an experience, the man with experience gets money
-
The problem is the clubs that do not have to have any fiscal responsibility are setting the transfer market standards. Look at what Liverpool have paid for a bunch of adequate but by no means brilliant players. I agree with the sentiment of most on here, we really need to see the end of the big wages to average players era but it shouldn't be done in a way which totally demoralizes the supporters. If we want to be a big club we need a big supporter base, selling our best players and not replacing them is not the way to do it.
-
Robbo you really think we are a big club?
-
The biggest puzzle for me though is how on earth O'Neill managed to win any sort of tribunal. All Randy needed to do surely was slap the Beye contract down on the table, and turn on his heels and walk out.
Tribunals don't work like that though. It only needs one process not complied with, and the complainant's dismissal will automatically be judged to be unfair.
Or, y'know, he might have had a case.
-
Robbo you really think we are a big club?
Yes, we are.
-
Robbo you really think we are a big club?
Of course we are, any which way you look at it.
-
Robbo you really think we are a big club?
I said if we want to be a big club, i think supporters of this club believe it's something we should aspire to. We are the biggest club in the midlands by some margin, the only thing stopping us from being classed as a big club is we are not in the major European club tournament and although i believe we have a huge supporter base only a small minority attend matches, me being one of them.
-
If there is money available for transfer fees, why can't part of this be used to fund players wages?
I think the issue here, and some of our more fiscally minded contributors may correct me, is that a transfer fee is seen as a capital asset - as in still of value to the club after the money has been paid. If the value of the club includes the playing squad, then by forking out £10m on someone adds £10m to the value of the club and therefore Randy's asset. Although we've had some bad ones, the likes of Ash, Downing and Milner are all great examples of this. Whereas with wages, they go out of the club to no return, other than the playing playing for us.
So if spent right the fee is seen as a sound capital investment that can be liquidised if necessary, but the wages cannot.
-
But in that case bringing in a Free Transfer would be seen as better capital wouldn't it? As in he cost us nothing up front and now has a value to us. Even if it's just £1m or whatever.
-
Yes John, it all comes back to cash at the end of the day. You need cash to buy players and pay their wages.
-
But in that case bringing in a Free Transfer would be seen as better capital wouldn't it? As in he cost us nothing up front and now has a value to us. Even if it's just £1m or whatever.
In theory, yes. But with a significant signing on fee and high wages, it'd be more the minus column than the plus. And let's not forget that most frees are slightly older, so the resale value would be minimal.
As it goes, I think taking the hit on someone like Diarra would be worth it, but then it's not my money!
-
I'd like Randy to talk out myself, not with the Press necessarily, but what about the fans ?
I can see him selling the club within the next 3 years.
-
Robbo you really think we are a big club?
You don't?
-
Robbo you really think we are a big club?
You don't?
Ah not this load of semantic bollocks again!
We've got a big ground and a great history. At the moment though, our ambitions look distinctly mid-table.
-
Robbo you really think we are a big club?
You don't?
Ah not this load of semantic bollocks again!
We've got a big ground and a great history. At the moment though, our ambitions look distinctly mid-table.
I think too often the word 'ambition' really means 'resources'.
-
[/quote]
We've got a big ground and a great history. At the moment though, our ambitions look distinctly mid-table.
[/quote]
We're consolidating our position!
-
AVFC is a big club, but the owners are not backing it with 'big club' finance. I'm sure the General once said that if MON wanted a £25-30M player that the club could support that level of transfer - how times have changed when we can't even afford wages for Hitz unless we 'trade' first.
-
Robbo you really think we are a big club?
You don't?
Ah not this load of semantic bollocks again!
We've got a big ground and a great history. At the moment though, our ambitions look distinctly mid-table.
I think too often the word 'ambition' really means 'resources'.
I have the ambition to go balls deep into Mila Kunis but without hundreds of thousands of pounds worth of plastic surgery I'm not liable to achieve it.
-
Robbo you really think we are a big club?
You don't?
Ah not this load of semantic bollocks again!
We've got a big ground and a great history. At the moment though, our ambitions look distinctly mid-table.
I think too often the word 'ambition' really means 'resources'.
I have the ambition to go balls deep into Mila Kunis but without hundreds of thousands of pounds worth of plastic surgery I'm not liable to achieve it.
Chloroform would be cheaper!
-
Do you ever wish that you could go back to being a youngster again, only knowing what you know now? Well I wish we could rewind five years with Randy knowing what he knows now. Imagine not buying Curtis Davies, Marlon Harewood, Emile Heskey and all the other players that have taken a fortune out of the club for little return. I know that hindsight is a wonderful thing, but you have to wonder at the combination of circumstances that led to Lerner agreeing to the Beye deal. The biggest puzzle for me though is how on earth O'Neill managed to win any sort of tribunal. All Randy needed to do surely was slap the Beye contract down on the table, and turn on his heels and walk out.
Yep, I'm affraid so.
I was sick of a lot of the moaning during the MON years because, well, maoning gets on my tits, but in hindsight I regret that bell end ever being appointed manager and can only apologise for ever defending him to anybody about anything, even if I was right about certain things.
He got some things right but they were pretty obvious things. His best transfers were fairly obvious ones and even some of them lacked imagination.
But having read this thread and knowing that he knew the money was limited I am even more angry that he pissed it away so frivolously. When Randy came in I wished for Guus Hiddink or a man of that calibre, who would most certainly have delivered the poxy land of milk and honey that is the champions league with the funds O'Neill had. And to think he fucked off without attempting to clean up his own mess at the worst possible moment. It really makes my piss boil.
Still, Villa fans are resilient (well some are) and we'll get through this and recover.
As long as we are informed we can cope with most things. The club really needs to get its act together in this regard. You have told us more in a few pages than our CEO has in his entire tenure at Villa, pelty. That's shocking.
I hope these "obligations" were about securing extra investment from somewhere but to be frank, the sooner that money in football becomes less of a determinate factor the sooner we can all fall back in love with it again.
Because I'm really struggling to care about the game in general any more. I'll always love Villa but unless something is done soon football can go an fuck itself. I hardly watch neutral games any more, which would be unthinkable a couple of years ago.
I'm sick of SKY and their vulgar transfer totals. My mates lads talk about how much somebody costs more than how they play. The games in a terrible place.
I feel sorry for Randy as he tried his best, but he backed the wrong horse to begin with and this summer has been handled with all the subtlety and cunning of Frank Spencer.
The club needs a massive kick up the arse. What the hell does Paul Faulkner get paid for?
Maybe if we fucked him off we could get the midfielder we need, which isnt Hitzlsperger by the way.
Shit, I'm getting sucked into the gravitational pull of Terra Miserablis.
-
Shit, I'm getting sucked into the gravitational pull of Terra Miserablis.
No Maz.
What you stated is the reality of the situation and reality isn't always pleasant.
-
Do you ever wish that you could go back to being a youngster again, only knowing what you know now? Well I wish we could rewind five years with Randy knowing what he knows now. Imagine not buying Curtis Davies, Marlon Harewood, Emile Heskey and all the other players that have taken a fortune out of the club for little return. I know that hindsight is a wonderful thing, but you have to wonder at the combination of circumstances that led to Lerner agreeing to the Beye deal. The biggest puzzle for me though is how on earth O'Neill managed to win any sort of tribunal. All Randy needed to do surely was slap the Beye contract down on the table, and turn on his heels and walk out.
Yep, I'm affraid so.
I was sick of a lot of the moaning during the MON years because, well, maoning gets on my tits, but in hindsight I regret that bell end ever being appointed manager and can only apologise for ever defending him to anybody about anything, even if I was right about certain things.
He got some things right but they were pretty obvious things. His best transfers were fairly obvious ones and even some of them lacked imagination.
But having read this thread and knowing that he knew the money was limited I am even more angry that he pissed it away so frivolously. When Randy came in I wished for Guus Hiddink or a man of that calibre, who would most certainly have delivered the poxy land of milk and honey that is the champions league with the funds O'Neill had. And to think he fucked off without attempting to clean up his own mess at the worst possible moment. It really makes my piss boil.
Still, Villa fans are resilient (well some are) and we'll get through this and recover.
As long as we are informed we can cope with most things. The club really needs to get its act together in this regard. You have told us more in a few pages than our CEO has in his entire tenure at Villa, pelty. That's shocking.
I hope these "obligations" were about securing extra investment from somewhere but to be frank, the sooner that money in football becomes less of a determinate factor the sooner we can all fall back in love with it again.
Because I'm really struggling to care about the game in general any more. I'll always love Villa but unless something is done soon football can go an fuck itself. I hardly watch neutral games any more, which would be unthinkable a couple of years ago.
I'm sick of SKY and their vulgar transfer totals. My mates lads talk about how much somebody costs more than how they play. The games in a terrible place.
I feel sorry for Randy as he tried his best, but he backed the wrong horse to begin with and this summer has been handled with all the subtlety and cunning of Frank Spencer.
The club needs a massive kick up the arse. What the hell does Paul Faulkner get paid for?
Maybe if we fucked him off we could get the midfielder we need, which isnt Hitzlsperger by the way.
Shit, I'm getting sucked into the gravitational pull of Terra Miserablis.
Superb summing up - great post
-
Brilliant post Mazrim. Agree wholeheartedly.
-
Shit, I'm getting sucked into the gravitational pull of Terra Miserablis.
No Maz.
What you stated is the reality of the situation and reality isn't always pleasant.
I think that is what at least some of those of us who were accused of being moaners under MON were also doing. Stating fairly obvious facts such as that the likes of Harewood and Knight were not the kind of signings we were expecting when RL took over, nor were they the kind of signings that would get us into the top 4, resulted in dog's abuse. Ditto that the "quality" of the football left a lot to be desired. At the end of the day those saying that were absolutely right. It wasn't moaning, it was stating the reality of the situation as we saw it - and some of us at least balanced our comments by giving O'Neill credit for the good things he did. Our away form has rarely been better than it was under MON and he made some good signings in Young, Milner and Delph, for example.
On another point I find myself in agreement with Mr Smith, Heskey gets way more stick than he deserves, and is unfairly underrated, except it seems by PL and England managers. Whereas other players can seemingly do no wrong.
-
Bit late.
-
Do what I've done, Maz - don't fight it. In the space of two months I've gone from 'this won't happen...' to 'this can't be happening - they won't do this'... to 'this has happened'. Don't still entertain thoughts of Parker, or Milner, or Adam Johnson, or there being one more trick up the club's sleeve. It's not a smokescreen to convince other clubs we don't have much ££££ and won't pay high prices.... the creeping realisation of where we are now stings a bit to begin with, but you get used to it. We're still better off than a lot of PL clubs, in many ways.
I've set my sights at a season of consolidation, at looking forward to seeing N'Zogbia and Bent; at hoping Bannan gets some decent game time; at the continued development of Albrighton and Clark; at shouting: 'yes, Seamus!' whenever the magnificent Irishman pulls off a save.
-
On another point I find myself in agreement with Mr Smith, Heskey gets way more stick than he deserves, and is unfairly underrated, except it seems by PL and England managers. Whereas other players can seemingly do no wrong.
It's a tall order, but i'd like to see the same Heskey who had a few brilliant games for us under Houllier.
He was holding the ball up superbly and his passing was radar like.
I think it went out of the window after his sending off.
Would still like to see him up front with Bent, but I would guess that's out of the question without a midfield enforcer.
-
Shit, I'm getting sucked into the gravitational pull of Terra Miserablis.
No Maz.
What you stated is the reality of the situation and reality isn't always pleasant.
I think that is what at least some of those of us who were accused of being moaners under MON were also doing. Stating fairly obvious facts such as that the likes of Harewood and Knight were not the kind of signings we were expecting when RL took over, nor were they the kind of signings that would get us into the top 4, resulted in dog's abuse. Ditto that the "quality" of the football left a lot to be desired. At the end of the day those saying that were absolutely right. It wasn't moaning, it was stating the reality of the situation as we saw it - and some of us at least balanced our comments by giving O'Neill credit for the good things he did. Our away form has rarely been better than it was under MON and he made some good signings in Young, Milner and Delph, for example.
On another point I find myself in agreement with Mr Smith, Heskey gets way more stick than he deserves, and is unfairly underrated, except it seems by PL and England managers. Whereas other players can seemingly do no wrong.
As someone who was firmly in the 'happy clapper camp', I think the thing that got me sticking up for him the most was the lack of balance, as you rightly say, but also some expected us to get there far quicker than was realistic, other than with Man City level of cash. You mention Knight above and he's a prime example as some would say 'crap player and not what we need', but considering when we bought him, the fact we sold him for a profit and we improved while he was here, he proved a useful stepping stone for us. Harewood was similar, but he stuck around for too long due to his wages.
And that's probably where the realisation is now coming from. Our on the pitch results were very good and we were making progress, but the finances behind it weren't balancing out and something had to give. The excessive stockpiling of unused players were holding back the kids, plus holding back our further building with more of the Bents, Young and Milners. I suppose it was like buying your first house and spending so much doing it up that you'd never get it all back, so you're stopped from buying your next place until you balance your books a bit!
-
Do what I've done, Maz - don't fight it. In the space of two months I've gone from 'this won't happen...' to 'this can't be happening - they won't do this'... to 'this has happened'. Don't still entertain thoughts of Parker, or Milner, or Adam Johnson, or there being one more trick up the club's sleeve. It's not a smokescreen to convince other clubs we don't have much ££££ and won't pay high prices.... the creeping realisation of where we are now stings a bit to begin with, but you get used to it. We're still better off than a lot of PL clubs, in many ways.
I've set my sights at a season of consolidation, at looking forward to seeing N'Zogbia and Bent; at hoping Bannan gets some decent game time; at the continued development of Albrighton and Clark; at shouting: 'yes, Seamus!' whenever the magnificent Irishman pulls off a save.
Thats what I'm doing....Just accepting this season for what it is....maybe sneak a few rows further forward with the season tickets as people drop out....shorter queues for drinks at half time. Bed my kids into a lifetime of misery like my Dad did for me ! That kind of thing.
And then enjoy the odd Bent goal, perhaps a shock win against a top 4 side, maybe the emergence of Gardner. One or two boozy away wins. 10th place kind of thing.
I've no choice, VTID an all that.
-
I've posted elsewhere that MON was very much old school in that it was up to the Chairmen to sort how we afforded it he just wanted the players. That's also how most fans think, so it is little wonder He was supported by most.
It's a piece of piss with 20/20 hindsight to say it was wrong but if we were only a couple of wins away from a top 4 spot. Barry, Milner and Young might still be here and things would have looked very different.
It was a gamble but it very nearly worked and isn't that what sport is supposed to be about?
-
A gamble with too high a price, as it turns out.
With hindsight, would it have made much difference if we'd finished fourth instead of sixth one season?
MON's brand of football would not have last long in the Champions League - about as long as it took us to meet a side who knew how to pass it around, which would probably have been the qualifying round.
-
A gamble with too high a price, as it turns out.
With hindsight, would it have made much difference if we'd finished fourth instead of sixth one season?
MON's brand of football would not have last long in the Champions League - about as long as it took us to meet a side who knew how to pass it around, which would probably have been the qualifying round.
As I said it would have kept players here. It would have also enabled us to attract a higher level of signing and It would have given us more money. We had a decent record against our own top sides who invariably did well in the Champions League so I don't accept it as a given that we'd have been easy prey.
It might have all have gone tits up but again, that's sport.
Now I find myself arguing in favour of fiscal responsibility. I know that is probably the right thing but fuck me it's boring.
-
If we had had qualified we would no doubt have kept 3 of the midfielders that are now playing for the two favourites for the title.
-
If we had had qualified we would no doubt have kept 3 of the midfielders that are now playing for the two favourites for the title.
No chance.
-
Do you not think had we beat Man City and Spurs to the 4th spot Milner would have not joined them in that close season? I'm not so sure.
Just sad to see those three now all competing a million miles away from where we are.
-
Players rarely leave a club that is in the CL for one that isn't if they have any say in the matter.
-
Players rarely leave a club that is in the CL for one that isn't if they have any say in the matter.
Man City offering to double their wages might well have changed their minds, as it did when they bought the likes of Adebayor from Arsenal.
-
Do you not think had we beat Man City and Spurs to the 4th spot Milner would have not joined them in that close season? I'm not so sure.
Just sad to see those three now all competing a million miles away from where we are.
He'd have gone. If he hadn't gone that year, he'd have gone the one after.
As Risso said, Man City offer stupid money and get the players they want. They've done that with plenty of players from CL clubs.
We were also never going to keep Young from joining Man United, regardless of whether we were in the CL.
-
I guess. I'm just wearing my claret and blue tinted specs. MON would have probably rested them all anyway!
-
Players rarely leave a club that is in the CL for one that isn't if they have any say in the matter.
Man City offering to double their wages might well have changed their minds, as it did when they bought the likes of Adebayor from Arsenal.
That's one player, it doesn't really warrant a likes of.
It's a pointless argument as we can't know either way but at the very least it would have increased the odds on them staying.
-
Toure, Toure, Robinho, Tevez....
-
That's one player, it doesn't really warrant a likes of.
Yaya Toure, Robinho, Kolo Toure, David Silva, Tevez, Balotelli.
-
Do you not think had we beat Man City and Spurs to the 4th spot Milner would have not joined them in that close season? I'm not so sure.
Just sad to see those three now all competing a million miles away from where we are.
He'd have gone. If he hadn't gone that year, he'd have gone the one after.
As Risso said, Man City offer stupid money and get the players they want. They've done that with plenty of players from CL clubs.
We were also never going to keep Young from joining Man United, regardless of whether we were in the CL.
You just cannot say that.
Who knows what might have happened after qualifying the first time? Bigger and better signings would have given us the opportunity to keep advancing. It would have been a totally different landscape.
-
You just cannot say that.
Who knows what might have happened after qualifying the first time? Bigger and better signings would have given us the opportunity to keep advancing. It would have been a totally different landscape.
The problem being that as others have said, getting to the qualifying round is one thing, as Everton found out, getting into the group stages is another. I'm not certain that we would have been equipped technically to actually get there. Christ knows we had enough trouble getting into the Europa League.
-
That's one player, it doesn't really warrant a likes of.
Yaya Toure, Robinho, Kolo Toure, David Silva, Tevez, Balotelli.
They were all players that for varying reasons their selling clubs were happy to see move on (Tevez was only on loan at Manu).
Of course Man City's money has distorted the market but being able to offer Barry and Milner CL football I believe would have kept them here.
-
You really would argue black was white rather than admit you were wrong.
-
You really would argue black was white rather than admit you were wrong.
The David Starkey of H&V
-
That's one player, it doesn't really warrant a likes of.
Yaya Toure, Robinho, Kolo Toure, David Silva, Tevez, Balotelli.
They were all players that for varying reasons their selling clubs were happy to see move on (Tevez was only on loan at Manu).
Not really relevant to what you were talking about, which was the willingness of players to move to a non CL club from one in it, not the desire of the club to sell.
-
You really would argue black was white rather than admit you were wrong.
I'm not wrong, I said players RARELY move from a club in the CL to one that isn't and I stand by that. Who have Manu or Chelsea had to sell?
Man City have been able to take advantage of clubs who need the money or want players off the books but it isn't a common occurrence.
I can't understand why anyone would argue against the idea that if we'd got into it then it would have helped us in our attempts to hold on to our better players and attract others, it seems obvious to me.
-
Man City have been able to take advantage of the fact they've got a near bottomless pit of money and can pay players 200k a week.
That's got far more to do with it than fortuitous circumstances involving selling clubs.
-
Man City have been able to take advantage of the fact they've got a near bottomless pit of money and can pay players 200k a week.
That's got far more to do with it than fortuitous circumstances involving selling clubs.
That's what I meant by "they can take advantage of". The have the finance to do it but in most cases there has been a willing seller.
For some reason you all seem to what to get bogged down in detail to distract from the real argument that if we'd qualified we'd have a chance of holding on to Barry in the first season. If that had seen us improve again, Milner might have felt he was better off here etc etc.
It's not a certainty, of course, but neither is your "no chance".
-
So players won't leave teams who are in the Champions League to join ones that aren't, unless of course it's Man City who come calling. Who was it who Barry and Milner joined?
-
I think we would have struggled competing on both a PL and CL front under O'Neill. He could put out a side that could get results, but he didn't show any obvious skill in making use of a squad and I think we would have struggled towards the end of the season playing that many games with the same team. In my opinion, financially we would always have been in trouble because even if we had made it to the Champions League we wouldn't have stayed there.
-
Can we have another £100 million please Mr.Lerner as arsenal look like they there for the taking?
-
I think getting into the CL proper might have helped us hang on to players a liittle longer, and attract some new ones, but only as long as we reamined a CL team. However if O'Neill's squad weren't tehcnically and tactically astute enough to get past a rather average European outfit like Rapid Vienna (twice), it has to be doubtful whether they would have been equipped to get through the qualifying round of the CL even if we had managed a 4th place finish.
-
What players would we have attracted? We certainly wouldn't have signed them from any further afield than Lands End or John A'Groats.
-
What players would we have attracted? We certainly wouldn't have signed them from any further afield than Lands End or John A'Groats.
Actually that's a good point, even with the lure of CL football, MON was more likely to have still gone after Aiden McGeady and Robbie Keane than Rafael Van der Vaart.
-
So, is the argument that the good players we have lost would have gone anyway if we had gotten 4th? That we wouldn't have qualified anyway? In that case, what difference does it make whether we got there or not? And do you all retract the criticism of MON for not getting there?
Personally, and I said this at the time, if we did qualifying for the CL the mot important thing is then doing it for the next season aswell. In one year and then out again won't keep players, attract other players or overly improve the club financially. However, if you can stay there for a while and establish yourself, that will. We probably would have spend the first few years getting knocked out in the group stages, but as a learning process that would help us and the continued revenue and exposure would make us be seen as a bigger club and that added profile helps when trying to retain your best players and negotiating with top level signings. In the same way a club promoted to the PL thinks about staying there only for the first couple of years and then the increased revenue and stability allows them to start progressing up the league, a club like ours would have to take the same approach to the CL.
-
Let's say we had a few seasons in there. Whilst that may make us an attractive proposition to a Van Der Vaart, do you honestly believe MON would have tried to sign him?
I would suggest he would have been far more likely to tell Randy that the increased revenue means we should pay the stupid wages that Jermaine Defoe wants.
-
Let's say we had a few seasons in there. Whilst that may make us an attractive proposition to a Van Der Vaart, do you honestly believe MON would have tried to sign him?
I would suggest he would have been far more likely to tell Randy that the increased revenue means we should pay the stupid wages that Jermaine Defoe wants.
Would've been better than Ivanhoe.
-
If I was given a brief saying "Look, there is x amount of money to spend over the next few years and we also need to keep the club within something like touch regarding wages" the first thing I'd think is "Christ I have to keep an eye on signing the right players on the right contracts, for the right money". I wouldn't even be considering signing Luke Young as right back and then Habib Beye to compete with him (both on circa £40k p/w) and then using Cuellar as right back after all. I wouldn't be buying an entire defence to replace another defence I'd already bought when we needed a top striker like Bent, who was available. I wouldn't be buying Heskey in any circumstances and absolutely not on £60k p/w.
It's not all MONs fault although I now hold him as the major culprit to say the least. The deals should not have been sanctioned to start with and more interest should have been shown in MONs team building strategy, which now appears to be scarcely a strategy at all. But that would require some football men on the board or in the upstairs organisation and we didn't have that and still do not. The board were naive and gave MON complete control. Yes, that's how Randy rolls but it's blown up in his face.
However, it still could have worked if he'd just bought Bent at the time he went to Sunderland, or even sooner. Or somebody similar. I think that would have been enough to fire us out of the slump we had post Moscow when we had a foot on Arsenal's throat. Alas.
All is not lost, far from it, but we're going to be feeling the aftershocks of MON's profligacy for a while.
-
I think getting into the CL proper might have helped us hang on to players a liittle longer, and attract some new ones, but only as long as we reamined a CL team. However if O'Neill's squad weren't tehcnically and tactically astute enough to get past a rather average European outfit like Rapid Vienna (twice), it has to be doubtful whether they would have been equipped to get through the qualifying round of the CL even if we had managed a 4th place finish.
But even then we would have starved one of our (then) rivals of CL funds, and limited their ability to attract players, for a year.
-
It's all ifs though isn't it Maz? there must be somwthing of the egotist in Randy that he thought he could leave the manager to manage the transfers without someone with a football backgound on the board to hold up the warning signs. The Browns havn't done well since he's had control of them and i just wonder if he has bitten of more than he can chew.
-
It's all ifs though isn't it Maz? there must be somwthing of the egotist in Randy that he thought he could leave the manager to manage the transfers without someone with a football backgound on the board to hold up the warning signs. The Browns havn't done well since he's had control of them and i just wonder if he has bitten of more than he can chew.
I'm not sure ego comes into it. Trust perhaps.
He trusted in the repuation of MON and invested heavily in it.
As for the Browns, that's true, but after a succession of less than stellar appointments he has now put the right man in the job in the form of Mike Holmgren. That's a pretty big deal in NFL.
It would be like Villa appointing a top director of football.
I think something similar needs to happen at Villa for continuity's sake.
-
If ManU can launch themselves on Singapore Stock Market. Maybe we can do so on, say, the HK market? We seemed to be flavour of the month over there recently.
The Chinese have developed a serious taste for PL football in recent years!
Share issues and Hedge fund stuff is more Randy's forte although he fell foul of his investments in the States and holdings in Bank of America bit him on the bum, it doesn't mean the cash-rich Chinese would not go for a chance at owning part of a major Football club with long term tradition, etc. It could be a way forward to extricate ourselves from the cap in hand scenario we appear to be in.
Solid performances bringing in steady revenue with good economic control in place. It could be a strategy that would allow us to spend a bit, prudently, without risking too much overall.
ManU will sell themselves and I am not suggesting we have anything quite like their current status, but we do have similar saleability and a chance to make money for investors if success comes as a result of acquiring the right players and infrastructure. I wonder what we might recoup on a similar launch?
just a thought..nothing more.
-
I'm not sure pawning off large parts of the club is the right way to go.
-
Perhaps? We did it under Doug and Randy bought the the majority shareholding. I remember paying £4.00 a share and the SP going to a £1 or so before bouncing back courtesy of ex-WHU chairman buying loads at lowest ebb. It does bring in money and allows for takeover or eventual buy-back from a positive performance.
It would allow us to be sold aggressively into an expanding Chinese market...but just an idea, as I say, to get the wherewithal to get us out of our current predicament.
Maybe Randy will sort his financial matters out in US and all will be well, although that may take a while?
Then the Chinese are, allegedly, 'debt-free' and on the hunt for anything new and shiny!
-
Agree with a lot of what Mazrim says but the sentence:-
Quote:"But that would require some football men on the board or in the upstairs organisation and we didn't have that and still do not."
Shows that the board have still not learnt from the mistakes of the past.
We need to have initiatives in growing the revenue and the first step is to grow the fanbase.
Going forward we have to enlarge our fanbase without necessarily improving the team. A huge call but surely we have to concentrate on the kids, in our local area of the midlands.
Have a clear 5 year strategy of building up a database of supporters with children who want FREE tickets to matches. Advertise in all local papers within a 50 mile radius of Villa park for parents to sign up.
There are going to be quite a few empty seats over the coming years, so lets at least try and look to the longer term and give some of them away.
These schemes have been tried in the past but have never lasted very long due to short term considerations of cost. But if we gave away 5000 tickets to all the home games over the next 5 seasons (excluding games against the top 5 teams say) what is it really going to cost. How many of those games will we have more than 37k in anyway. Even if costed at 4seats for £50 as per a current offer it adds up to less than £5m over 5 years (half a habib beye)
We clearly would limit how many times a season any 1 person would get a ticket (1 or 2 a season).
Target whoever is marketing this to end up with at least 100,000 names of potential paying supporters with kids who are asking for shirts, tickets etc.
We are already the biggest club in the midlands but we have no real presence in the area. We have an advantage over all the other clubs around us but we have not pressed this home. If we had spent a tiny proportion of the money already wasted, into these type of schemes who knows where we could be.
If we end up with a bigger fanbase and selling out the stadium up to 37k (plus 5k free) then development can take place to enlarge the ground. etc etc.
It won't be easy but kids are less results orientated initially, it's about the buzz and excitement at that age.
If it fails then at least we will know we are what we are.
-
Let's say we had a few seasons in there. Whilst that may make us an attractive proposition to a Van Der Vaart, do you honestly believe MON would have tried to sign him?
I would suggest he would have been far more likely to tell Randy that the increased revenue means we should pay the stupid wages that Jermaine Defoe wants.
That's a rather pointless argument. If we had a few seasons in the CL it would suggest that he'd signed the right players.
-
Is it time for me to dust off the M5 corridor plan again?
-
We've spent years saying tickets should be sold cheaper/given away. Then when they're cheaper they should be even cheaper, and when we give some away we should give more. Then season ticket holders moan that they're losing out.
To repeat an old argument, Villa don't regularly get big gates because we never have.
-
We've spent years saying tickets should be sold cheaper/given away. Then when they're cheaper they should be even cheaper, and when we give some away we should give more. Then season ticket holders moan that they're losing out.
To repeat an old argument, Villa don't regularly get big gates because we never have.
We failed to build on an average attendance of 40,000+ a couple of seasons ago by failing to reach the Champions League. MON messed up big-time with his failure to sign Darren Bent (he had the chance in August 2009), if he had, I'm sure we would've got 40k gates regularly - and perhaps the the ground expansion to 51,000 might have happened. All this is now a million miles away. Looking back it's a pity a top European coach wasn't in charge. Armed with the amount of backing MON had a top coach would've got us to the CL by now. Chance has gone - mid-table team from now on.
-
But isn't that a bit defeatist, Dave?
Surely we should be trying everything possible to get people into the ground whether it's cheap/free tickets; free food; free drink; free transport, anything, surely?
-
But isn't that a bit defeatist, Dave?
Surely we should be trying everything possible to get people into the ground whether it's cheap/free tickets; free food; free drink; free transport, anything, surely?
It's stating a fact. We've tried just about everything to regularly increase gates but they never work long-term and last year we saw season ticket holders alienated.
-
But isn't that a bit defeatist, Dave?
Surely we should be trying everything possible to get people into the ground whether it's cheap/free tickets; free food; free drink; free transport, anything, surely?
Give stuff away for free and people then resent having to pay for it next time, they'll just wait for another freebie.
-
Armed with the amount of backing MON had a top coach would've got us to the CL by now. Chance has gone - mid-table team from now on.
Maybe, maybe not.
But what I don't agree with is this 'chance has gone' rubbish. Every year that we didn't finish 4th someone on here told us "The chance has gone - we'll never have a better opportunity" only for us to get closer the following season. OK, we're in a re-building phase right now so it'll be a year or two until we can realistically challenge for top 6 again, but by it's very nature football is a cyclical game and ALL teams will have ups and downs.
How long will Roman/the Sheikhs maintain their interest?
What happens and Man Utd once Fergie goes?
Will the gradual decline at Arsenal continue?
Lots of things can happen and we shouldn't just be thinking 'mid table for us', but rather striving to be the best we can be, both on and off the pitch, so that we're in a position to capitalise when a top teams starts to fade. Because that WILL happen.
-
It's a point raised by others before, but bears repeating nonetheless - nobody knows how the football landscape will look in 5, even 3 years. If back in 2006 you would have said that Man City would be paying a player 250,000 a week, you would have been carted off to the funny farm. At the moment, yes, it does look bleak, but you never know for certain what will happen.
-
It's a point raised by others before, but bears repeating nonetheless - nobody knows how the football landscape will look in 5, even 3 years. If back in 2006 you would have said that Man City would be paying a player 250,000 a week, you would have been carted off to the funny farm. At the moment, yes, it does look bleak, but you never know for certain what will happen.
Seconded. It's swings & roundabouts. Nobody in 1972 would have believed a first division game at Villa Park would get 8k 14 years later and similarly that crowd in 1986 would have been amazed at the gates we've been getting lately.
-
There have always been ups and downs in football, but unless the billionaires (and Sky) get bored and bugger of en masse, and the Champions League implodes, I think it's irrevocably broken. Blackburn were probably the last side to get lucky at the right time. Then you could get players of the calibre of the young Alan Shearer for £4m, and even though they were seen as big spenders, their entire team probably cost the same as Torres cost Chelsea. The only chance you've got now of riding the crest of a wave is for somebody to come in and spend big.
-
Three years ago it was confidently predicted on here that the top 4 was set in stone. Since then 2 different sides have broken the cartel. It really is unwise to look further ahead than the current season.
-
Three years ago it was confidently predicted on here that the top 4 was set in stone. Since then 2 different sides have broken the cartel. It really is unwise to look further ahead than the current season.
Exactly.
We can't duplicate what Man City did, but we can duplicate what Spurs did.
-
Man City's millions and the ineptitude of Liverpool's previous owners, have ensured that the Top 4 aren't as secure as when we were trying to break the glass ceiling two or three seasons ago.
The money at City has changed everything, but there are still some glimmers that other clubs could get their opportunity over the next few seasons.
Granted people have been saying it for years, but the day that Fergie gives up the day job will see a massive upheaval at Old Trafford. The influence he currently wields over every part of the club will make it a difficult place for his successor. I could easily see it unravelling quite quickly, if not as spectacularly as post-Busby.
Abramovich basically has the sole ambition now of winning the Champions League. Were they to do so (shudder), how long would be hang around?
Arsenal currently look the most likely to fall off the Top 4 perch. That may well happen this season.
-
Man City didn't sell out for the season opener against Swansea on Monday.
Yeah it was on TV, but Swansea sold out and Citeh 'only' managed 46k. Our attendances will only swell if he have a successful period. Our core fanbase is what it is and without that it's not gonna change.
-
The way things are now going, there's almost an argument to say that the big four is now the big three - Man Utd, City and Chelsea looking to break away from the rest. Arsenal, Liverpool, Spurs a class behind.
-
Man City didn't sell out for the season opener against Swansea on Monday.
Yeah it was on TV, but Swansea sold out and Citeh 'only' managed 46k. Our attendances will only swell if he have a successful period. Our core fanbase is what it is and without that it's not gonna change.
It's very common for there to be lower crowds for this period in August. Holidays do play a big part.
-
The way things are now going, there's almost an argument to say that the big four is now the big three - Man Utd, City and Chelsea looking to break away from the rest. Arsenal, Liverpool, Spurs a class behind.
Agreed. Sky will be spitting feathers. The less competitive the league is the lower the audiences.
-
Man City didn't sell out for the season opener against Swansea on Monday.
Yeah it was on TV, but Swansea sold out and Citeh 'only' managed 46k. Our attendances will only swell if he have a successful period. Our core fanbase is what it is and without that it's not gonna change.
It's very common for there to be lower crowds for this period in August. Holidays do play a big part.
Still though, 41k home fans after they've just signed someone who's potentially the best player in the country?
We're not that far behind them.
-
There are already signs of the wage bubble beginning to burst (out of contract players etc), the TV money bubble could be next with the effect of streaming, murmurs (yet again) of a european super league - anything could happen in the medium term.
I hope the current Dougonomics on the playing side of things is balanced off the pitch with long term investments off it. Villa clubs across the region (a number throughout the city plus Worcester to Lichfield and possibly beyond). Get the next generation of both academy players and supporters in the pipeline. Cheap opportunity to see games live, with these clubs seen as an extension of the ground, quality coaching for kids.
It's time we found our new model, rather than the over reliance on tv cash, stinging supporters for tickets and merchandise etc. We need to remember that we are Aston Villa NOT a ManU_lite, and do things our way, the way they should be done. If we end up playing the likes of Forest and Wednesday in a new national league so be it, let the best players bugger off into a european super league, let the tv cash go to the "big / glamour" clubs, at least we'd have our game back.
back on topic, my Q for Randy - can I have Faulkners job please?
-
There are already signs of the wage bubble beginning to burst (out of contract players etc), the TV money bubble could be next with the effect of streaming, murmurs (yet again) of a european super league - anything could happen in the medium term.
It's amazing how many of these bubbles there are in football though. Two in one decade suggests that people in football don't learn their lesson at all.
-
We've spent years saying tickets should be sold cheaper/given away. Then when they're cheaper they should be even cheaper, and when we give some away we should give more. Then season ticket holders moan that they're losing out.
To repeat an old argument, Villa don't regularly get big gates because we never have.
Agree with every word. But you are talking about the past.
Previously the marketing of such schemes have been short lived and focused on immediate results.
I was talking about a concentrated ongoing marketing strategy over a 5 year period with a specific remit to develop a database of younger potential fans, developing a relationship by visiting schools on a continuing basis etc, etc.
The type of scheme I envisaged has to be far more proactive than in the past and with the digital age, enabling us to understand the demographic and locations of our future fanbase and hopefully to expand on the current numbers would lead to huge future potential opportunities.
There are no guarantees but if we sit back and do nothing then you're right it will be the same old same old.
As for giving away freebies upsetting existing ST's as long as the aims of the scheme is explained to them, preferably before it is announced I think we might be surprised as to how few would complain.
At the end of the day we would all like to see a bigger VP full with a better team on the pitch.
For me I can't see what we really have to lose if nothing else it would raise the profile of the club. I equally don't expect it to happen as currently we seem to be totally adverse to seeing our name publicised.
-
The way things are now going, there's almost an argument to say that the big four is now the big three - Man Utd, City and Chelsea looking to break away from the rest. Arsenal, Liverpool, Spurs a class behind.
Except that while there are 4 places for the Champions League, there will be a big 4. I can't see Liverpool or Spurs overtaking Arsenal this year.
-
Neither can I. And Wenger will spend some of that money before the window shuts.
They already have a better side than Spurs or Liverpool and it will get better.
-
I agree that on paper Arsenal have a better side than Liverpool/Spurs, but I'd still not be so certain they will finish in the top 4. They have lost 2 key players in Fabregas and Nasri who won't be easy to replace. Add to that the constant injury issues that RVP has, the uncertainty at the back (rookie keeper and only the one decent centre back). Of course this all depends on who Wenger brings in, but he's never been one to splash the cash on established players that often.
EDIT - they've also got rid of Denilson, Clichy and Eboue with Bentdner looking like he is off too. Although not world beaters, still decent squad players that they haven't really replaced.
-
The thing with Arsenal is that if you judge things based on the ability of the players with the ball at their feet only, then they're better than anything in our league and 2nd only to Barcelona across Europe. However, being a successful football team involves more than that and it's in these other areas they are lacking:-
1. Strong defenders
2. A good leader on the pitch
3. Being mentally strong enough to roll with the punches over 38 games.
4. Variation in tactics.
They are a good side undoubtedly, but lesser sides get the better of them, and someone like Liverpool may finish ahead of them, but be ing stronger in these areas.
-
Neither can I. And Wenger will spend some of that money before the window shuts.
They already have a better side than Spurs or Liverpool and it will get better.
As it stands they've still got a shit keeper, a dodgy back 4, they've sold their best player and are about to lose their second best in addition they're got 2 players on 3 match bans after only 1 league game. Given Wenger's perverse attitude to signings I don't think you can predict anything with confidence.
-
As for giving away freebies upsetting existing ST's as long as the aims of the scheme is explained to them, preferably before it is announced I think we might be surprised as to how few would complain.
I think that's a gigantic simplification.
I personally wouldn't care how forward thinking the project was, i just wouldn't keep giving the club 600 quid for something they're telling me they are giving away for free.
-
They're an outfit short of confidence at the moment, they don't have that fluidity that they are renown and appear to lack fight. It's early days I know but if we judge them on their match with Udinese alone then top 6 might be a problem.
New quality players might help long term but as we know all too well it takes time for players to bed into a system and style. That puts pressure on Wenger to get results, it's okay building for the future but their supporters are fed up of waiting for the future and want some of that future now putting even more pressure on.
-
It's time we found our new model, rather than the over reliance on tv cash, stinging supporters for tickets and merchandise etc. We need to remember that we are Aston Villa NOT a ManU_lite, and do things our way, the way they should be done. If we end up playing the likes of Forest and Wednesday in a new national league so be it, let the best players bugger off into a european super league, let the tv cash go to the "big / glamour" clubs, at least we'd have our game back.
I like the sound of this, and the more constructive ideas that are now being offered in this thread. It would be good to think about whether we follow the crowd, and get a portion of the pie that is in keeping with our 'place in the current pecking order', or look at things which will make us more distinct in our identity.
I know statements like the above are short on specifics but I'd rather be trying something different than thinking about balance sheets and wages all the time. And a more independent revenue stream would mean we could actually not give a toss if Sky ignored us - which would be nice.
-
The £7m went towards paying off managers and back room staff.
Houllier and Mcallister must have been on a good screw and we paid £5m for Mcleish and his staff, not to mention the undisclosed fee to O'neill!!
Bad management.
-
This will please Randy but will it free up any equity to put into AVFC?
His shares in BoA plunged from $35 to $6 +- and may have been cause of his 'economies' at VP?
I wonder if Warren would be interested in a share of Villa? Now there is an investment!
"Bank of America's battered shares surged after on Thursday afternoon after announcing that Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway is to invest $5 billion
Over one year the troubled bank's shares have dropped 50%, and over one month they have fallen 37.8%. But after the news the bank had won the backing of the world's most high profile investor, investor sentiment surged. Shares were nearly 18% higher at $8.22.
The bank has spent the last two weeks batting off rumours that it is to be rescued by JP Morgan following blog posts which have speculated that it is lacking $200 billion of capital. 'I remain confident that we have the capital and liquidity we need to run our business,' said Bank of America chief executive officer Brian Moynihan in a statement announcing Berkshire Hathaway's investment today. ..."
http://www.citywire.co.uk/money/warren-buffett-to-invest-5-billion-in-bank-of-america/a519265?re=15634&ea=26592&utm_source=BulkEmail_Money_Daily&utm_medium=BulkEmail_Money_Daily&utm_campaign=BulkEmail_Money_Daily