Heroes & Villains, the Aston Villa fanzine
Heroes & Villains => Heroes Discussion => Topic started by: N'ZMAV on November 16, 2011, 08:40:06 AM
-
No smoke without fire: Lerner will sell, if the right offer is made
(http://www.thevillablog.co.uk/aston-villa-blog/avfc-news/no-smoke-without-fire-lerner-will-sell-if-the-right-offer-was-made/)
Charles Sale, Daily Mail
Aston Villa under American Randy Lerner are often given as the model for foreign ownership of a Premier League club. However, Lerner’s growing disenchantment with his involvement can be gauged by the fact that the first home game he attended this season was the win against Norwich 10 days ago. Friends say he would sell if he received the right offer.
A club spokesman said: ‘The owner’s eldest son has been switching schools in America which has meant that Randy hasn’t been able to come over for as many games as usual. But he watches every one live on TV.’
-
Replace "friends say" with "I'm guessing".
-
It might be true there's no smoke withouth fire but this report is so vague it's hardly worth bothering with.
-
Next time anyone uses the phrase 'no smoke without fire' someone should tell their friends/neighbours/work colleagues they're a child abuser and see what happens. After all, there's no smoke without fire.
-
Next time anyone uses the phrase 'no smoke without fire' someone should tell their friends/neighbours/work colleagues they're a child abuser and see what happens. After all, there's no smoke without fire.
Or point them in the direction of a dry ice machine.
-
Based on nothing but my gut instinct, I wouldn't be suprised if he did consider a reasonable offer.
Whether any offer would be forthcoming is anybody's guess. I dont doubt Villa would be a very attractive option for a wealthy buyer looking to get involved in English football.
Going wildly off into speculation land, I'd like to think that he could retain some sort of connection to the club if he did sell.
-
I've absolutely no doubt that he would sell, like Mazrim based on nothing but gut instinct.
That said, I've heard from a few places that he is also actively seeking outside investment in the club.
-
Just to be on the safe side, I think we should definitely starting picking our dream sides whilst we wait for Guus Hiddink to spend his £500m kitty.
They'll probably run a pipeline to B6 pumping gold bullion.
-
Based on nothing but my gut instinct, I wouldn't be suprised if he did consider a reasonable offer.
Whether any offer would be forthcoming is anybody's guess. I dont doubt Villa would be a very attractive option for a wealthy buyer looking to get involved in English football.
Going wildly off into speculation land, I'd like to think that he could retain some sort of connection to the club if he did sell.
He doesn't seem to have much of a connection now, not sure why he'd want one if he sold.
-
I'm not certain we could be that fortunate, Maz.
-
No story without bullshit.
-
A club spokesman said: ‘The owner’s eldest son has been switching schools in America which has meant that Randy hasn’t been able to come over for as many games as usual. But he watches every one live on TV.’
Just how many times has he switched schools? Can't they think of better bullshit than this?
-
While spurs announce record income based mainly on full grounds for every game, Randy has seen attendances drop by 1000's.
But I haven't a clue if he wants to sell, he could just be preparing the club in the same sort of way Newcastle are doing, or he could be looking to jump ship.
Point is we know how Randy operates, so nobody knows anything.
-
What a load of unsubstantiated rubbish.
Define 'reasonable'
Name source
-
Based on nothing but my gut instinct, I wouldn't be suprised if he did consider a reasonable offer.
Whether any offer would be forthcoming is anybody's guess. I dont doubt Villa would be a very attractive option for a wealthy buyer looking to get involved in English football.
Going wildly off into speculation land, I'd like to think that he could retain some sort of connection to the club if he did sell.
He doesn't seem to have much of a connection now, not sure why he'd want one if he sold.
A bit harsh. Whatever the staus quo, he has invested in the club in every way.
I personally don't doubt for one second he cares for the club and probably always will.
-
A club spokesman said: ‘The owner’s eldest son has been switching schools in America which has meant that Randy hasn’t been able to come over for as many games as usual. But he watches every one live on TV.’
Just how many times has he switched schools? Can't they think of better bullshit than this?
I should imagine it's similar to over here.
When your kid's old enough they change schools, either to high school or university, as a parent there's loads of running about to do. No bullshit, just a fact of life.
-
Like others I'm sure he will sell if the right offer comes along. The question I'd ask is if it's going to come along.
-
A club spokesman said: ‘The owner’s eldest son has been switching schools in America which has meant that Randy hasn’t been able to come over for as many games as usual. But he watches every one live on TV.’
Just how many times has he switched schools? Can't they think of better bullshit than this?
I should imagine it's similar to over here.
When your kid's old enough they change schools, either to high school or university, as a parent there's loads of running about to do. No bullshit, just a fact of life.
What kind of running about? I may not be a parent, but I have two of them. Plus brothers and sisters. I dont remember my folks doing any running about (let alone dropping their business interests) for 4 months each time we changed school.
-
A club spokesman said: ‘The owner’s eldest son has been switching schools in America which has meant that Randy hasn’t been able to come over for as many games as usual. But he watches every one live on TV.’
Just how many times has he switched schools? Can't they think of better bullshit than this?
I should imagine it's similar to over here.
When your kid's old enough they change schools, either to high school or university, as a parent there's loads of running about to do. No bullshit, just a fact of life.
What kind of running about? I may not be a parent, but I have two of them. Plus brothers and sisters. I dont remember my folks doing any running about (let alone dropping their business interests) for 4 months each time we changed school.
Especially billionaire parents.
-
Fantastic research and writing there by Charles Sale. Take a well quoted fact like the last game was the first one Randy Lerner has attended this season, quote 'friends' of his and come up with a real jaw dropping story about someone being prepared to sell something if they receive the right offer.
-
That phrase no smoke without fire - Try asking Dave Jones - book with the same name just realised, and I will admit when the story broke about him I thought and maybe used the same phrase "no smoke without fire" - learned not to now
-
At least he got his own brand of sweets out of it.
-
every thing is for sale at the right price
-
Has anybody heard or seen this rumour?
You know what it's a small World, people say it all the time but is really is. I had the honour of attending some close friends wedding this weekend and who should appear at the at the reception? MM (not to be confused with MysteryMan), the man who worked at SkySportsNews, the man who's scatter gun approach to rumour flinging made him popular and despised in equal measure.
His life is going swimmingly, from dancing with Davina to recently being selected to host a pilot for a potential prime time terrestrial TV game show, so soon he could be a house hold name, but for now he shall remain as the one and only MM.
So after some severe ribbing about his hair cut and his new pose to hide the fact he's got a big chin, I tapped MM up for some of the media rumours around football... (remember these are journalistic or mystery tip-offs received by SkySportsNews, you must understand that they receive hundreds if not thousands of "tip-offs" everyday from people claiming to be in the know but are not able to quantify their information, but some of them are very, very good for a bit of rumour mongering. As much as people like to think SSN will put out any story on a whim, you must understand that every time they say "Sky Sports News understands..." that rumour has been through many, many pairs of hands and is only released to the news desk when the bosses are happy there is enough suggestive evidence.)
MM promised he would get in touch and get back to me, so this morning I check my e-mails and true to his word MM has forwarded an e-mail. For obvious reasons I can't show you the screen shot of the e-mail because it contains the information of both parties, however I will copy and paste the text. Interesting reading....
Hey Matt, as requested - Randy Lerner has contacted officials of Sheikh Hamad Bin Jassim Bin Jabr Al-Thani, you remember him right! Rumours have been that the Qatari's are looking at other Premier League clubs after being frustrated by a lack of movement at MU. This has prompted several chairman to contact the Sheikh's offices with the aim of raising interest in their club. Kenwright at Everton seem to have been rebuffed for reasons unknown.
However the latest club to make contact is Aston Villa, the source believes Lerner would be looking for £130-150m for the club, and the Qatari's are interested. The source (the same one who gave me Venkys) went on to say that several key factors play in to the hands of Aston Villa which makes them far more desirable than say Everton or Blackburn. Watch this space is all i can say, it would seem the horse has bolted and soon there will be another big player in the Premier League money stakes.
Hope that helps, catch up soon mate.
Interesting, I'm not going out and putting my house on the rumour, but it would certainly be an exciting time for Villa if it did happen.
I wonder what the "key factors" could be? Villa Park redevelopement?
I wonder if this is rumour mongering designed to make the Glaziers think again.....
The problem I see with this is the FFP... I don't see how they could come in to a club like Villa and turn us around like City have been... the process would have to be a slower one... but I suppose a few "sponsorship" (Qatari state sponsored of course ) deals would improve our turnover and spending power hugely...
-
A club spokesman said: ‘The owner’s eldest son has been switching schools in America which has meant that Randy hasn’t been able to come over for as many games as usual. But he watches every one live on TV.’
Just how many times has he switched schools? Can't they think of better bullshit than this?
I should imagine it's similar to over here.
When your kid's old enough they change schools, either to high school or university, as a parent there's loads of running about to do. No bullshit, just a fact of life.
What kind of running about? I may not be a parent, but I have two of them. Plus brothers and sisters. I dont remember my folks doing any running about (let alone dropping their business interests) for 4 months each time we changed school.
I'm sure had your parents worked in the US they'd have left a manager in charge while they sorted your school out.
Think it's a bit different 'dropping business interests' when you live and work nearby and when one of your businesses is a few 1000 miles away.
I don't think we're talking about the local village primary school here.
When my son goes to uni I'll be driving around the country to look them over so i'll be dropping loads to sort him out.
-
A club spokesman said: ‘The owner’s eldest son has been switching schools in America which has meant that Randy hasn’t been able to come over for as many games as usual. But he watches every one live on TV.’
Just how many times has he switched schools? Can't they think of better bullshit than this?
This is a lame excuse. Do you really think Randy the Billionaire has this problem and has he always spent his time by the side of his family? To make money people have to make many sacrifices and one of the common one is sorting everyday family stuff. Someone one else has to take care of that and money helps!
I should imagine it's similar to over here.
-
Like others I'm sure he will sell if the right offer comes along. The question I'd ask is if it's going to come along.
That's my take on things too.
For the price RL would need to receive to be tempted to sell, + the funds necessary to have a serious tilt at top 4 again, you're talking crazy money -at a conservative estimate not much change from £400 mill.
-
While spurs announce record income based mainly on full grounds for every game, Randy has seen attendances drop by 1000's.
Is this the Spurs who showed their ambition and fought off bids from cash-rich Champions League clubs to sign their best midfield player because they still maintained the determination to challenge for a top four spot again this season?
Compare that scenario with the one facing Villa fans who saw their two most creative and consequently valuable players sold and not adequately replaced.
Spurs maintained a feel-good factor, while Villa went down the opposite road altogether.
-
It is always possible and good practice to make a good story based on facts. Facts that you have cleverly established. However it is a common trait with the Press now days to steal facts if they don't have access and if they can not steal than they make up anything they like.
I don't know where the "Randy ready to sell" falls in that lot however of course he WILL sell if someone made him an acceptable offer. After all he is a trader and that is is what tradesmen do.
Let's hope if that happens than whoever buys us has his/her hand on either the oil or the gas tap because it will be a nightmare to fall in the hands of ex-undertakers from home or meat traders from the east. That would be a dead end in more ways than one.
-
While spurs announce record income based mainly on full grounds for every game, Randy has seen attendances drop by 1000's.
Is this the Spurs who showed their ambition and fought off bids from cash-rich Champions League clubs to sign their best midfield player because they still maintained the determination to challenge for a top four spot again this season?
Compare that scenario with the one facing Villa fans who saw their two most creative and consequently valuable players sold and not adequately replaced.
Spurs maintained a feel-good factor, while Villa went down the opposite road altogether.
In essence you're right but how exactly could villa have kept our better players when we were already overspending and needed transfer income.
-
the £130-£150m offer above is ludicrous when you consider the investment he has laid out on top of the original purchase price of £64m. I'd say he would be looking at more like £200m. No way will we be ever bought by rich people. It's Villa we are talking about, it will be a consortium consisting of Brian Richardson, the Bhatti Brothers, William Dugdale's nephew and Atholl Still. With Mike Neville installed to replace Faulkner.
-
the £130-£150m offer above is ludicrous when you consider the investment he has laid out on top of the original purchase price of £64m. I'd say he would be looking at more like £200m. No way will we be ever bought by rich people. It's Villa we are talking about, it will be a consortium consisting of Brian Richardson, the Bhatti Brothers, William Dugdale's nephew and Atholl Still. With Mike Neville installed to replace Faulkner.
We've already been bought by rich people.
That's the way it looks if you ask - say - Everton supporters.
-
While spurs announce record income based mainly on full grounds for every game, Randy has seen attendances drop by 1000's.
Is this the Spurs who showed their ambition and fought off bids from cash-rich Champions League clubs to sign their best midfield player because they still maintained the determination to challenge for a top four spot again this season?
Compare that scenario with the one facing Villa fans who saw their two most creative and consequently valuable players sold and not adequately replaced.
Spurs maintained a feel-good factor, while Villa went down the opposite road altogether.
In essence you're right but how exactly could villa have kept our better players when we were already overspending and needed transfer income.
It isn't just about keeping your better players, though. Sometimes that is just not possible. Look at Berbatov and Carrick at Spurs.
The important bit is what you do with the money you get from selling them. Re-investing the cash wisely is the productive, forward looking thing to do.
Clawing most of it back whilst continuing to talk about the need to reduce the wage bill and be self sufficient instead is fine if that's what the policy is going to be, but there can't be any pretence that we're being ambitious or growing the club while we do that, because quite obviously, we're not.
That's a pretty difficult plan to sell to people.
-
the £130-£150m offer above is ludicrous when you consider the investment he has laid out on top of the original purchase price of £64m. I'd say he would be looking at more like £200m. No way will we be ever bought by rich people. It's Villa we are talking about, it will be a consortium consisting of Brian Richardson, the Bhatti Brothers, William Dugdale's nephew and Atholl Still. With Mike Neville installed to replace Faulkner.
How much has he invested? Add together £64 million to the net spend on players and money spent on the club, then take away the money taken out of the club each year, how much is it exactly?
-
It doesn't say why
A club spokesman said: ‘The owner’s eldest son has been switching schools in America which has meant that Randy hasn’t been able to come over for as many games as usual. But he watches every one live on TV.’
Just how many times has he switched schools? Can't they think of better bullshit than this?
I should imagine it's similar to over here.
When your kid's old enough they change schools, either to high school or university, as a parent there's loads of running about to do. No bullshit, just a fact of life.
What kind of running about? I may not be a parent, but I have two of them. Plus brothers and sisters. I dont remember my folks doing any running about (let alone dropping their business interests) for 4 months each time we changed school.
It doesn't say why the child is changing schools though does it? Maybe the child is being bullied, has been in some trouble, has some special needs that require the family to seek out some specialist education. There could be a lot of things around "changing schools" which require a parent to pay a bit more attention for a while.
...but lets not consider that there might genuinely be a reason for him to put his family first for a few weeks, lets stick to thinking not going to The Villa for a couple of months means you've abandoned them. Of course, that might put a few others of us round here out of the picture too....
-
I don't really see how a situation whereby a child changes schools means that his parent can not find 24 hours at any point in three or four months to go and watch a football match - or, put another way, to tend to the needs of a business he has invested a lot of money into.
If the club are going to respond to nonsense like this, they really should stop and think a bit harder before spouting crud like this.
-
the £130-£150m offer above is ludicrous when you consider the investment he has laid out on top of the original purchase price of £64m. I'd say he would be looking at more like £200m. No way will we be ever bought by rich people. It's Villa we are talking about, it will be a consortium consisting of Brian Richardson, the Bhatti Brothers, William Dugdale's nephew and Atholl Still. With Mike Neville installed to replace Faulkner.
At a guess I would say that Randy has spent around £80m of his own money since taking over. Whilst he has spent a lot more than that in transfers he has also recouped quite a bit so I'd say his 'net' spend is around £80m. So at £150m he walks away about even.
-
NB - we owe him that money. He hasn't just written cheques and walked away. Most of it is in the shape of loans.
Anyone who wants to buy the club is going to also have to pay Randy that dough back.
-
I can't believe how many are prepared to take what the media say and accuse Villa of, basically, telling lies.
I don't think that it's a secret that Randy's looking for people to invest in the club. Does that mean he want's to sell? Of course not.
If he want's to sort his lads education out, then that's not a problem.
He obviously trusts his management team, I think we should show a bit of trust too.
-
Not sure about the smoke or the fires, but the idea that anyone wouldn't sell if the price was right is a novel one.
-
NB - we owe him that money. He hasn't just written cheques and walked away. Most of it is in the shape of loans.
Anyone who wants to buy the club is going to also have to pay Randy that dough back.
"We" dont really owe him a penny. He borrowed from one of his assets to finance another because it suited him and represented the best way of doing so. Currently Aston Villa is Randy Lerner for all financial considerations.
If he was to sell he could essentially write the debt off or include it in the sale price, it's up to him.
Yes, the terms of the trust say he has to pay it back from somewhere no doubt but it needn't be at Villa's expense.
But let's hypothesise (it's fun) £150m plus settling any outstanding debts would be (at a guess) about £180-£200m which I think is about right. A business turning over the best part of a £100m must be at least worth that.
The wage bill reductions coupled with the sponsorship deals and increased SKY money must have took a large chunk of any outstanding debts (to the Lerner trust). It has all the hallmarks of preparing a business for sale in my opinion. It's like it's being hoovered for a new tenant.
Just a feeling, it could also be simple belt tightening and pulling in the drawbridge of ambition but Lerner doesn't strike me as the sort to hold on to Villa if it's not competitive (The Browns are a different matter). I'm sure he hinted as much when he took over. So I wouldn't be at all suprised to see him actively courting suitors or investors.
Bias aside, if I was somebody like the Qatari royal family (for instance) were looking at buying a club as a project to have some fun with, use as a PR vehicle, prestigious luxury asset and build (expand) a business empire with relatively low expenditure (in comparison to some other PL clubs, areas) and massive potential, Villa would be high up on the list.
But let's not get carried away. There's nothing but rumours and hearsay and perhaps just pure speculation and fantasy at best. And despite being disenchanted, confused and annoyed with how Villa have acted this last year or so, if Randy wants to keep at it, that's fine by me.
-
If he was to sell he could essentially write the debt off or include it in the sale price, it's up to him.
Yes, the terms of the trust say he has to pay it back from somewhere no doubt but it needn't be at Villa's expense.
But let's hypothesise (it's fun) £150m plus settling any outstanding debts would be (at a guess) about £180-£200m which I think is about right. A business turning over the best party of a £100m must be at least that.
The wage bill reductions coupled with the sponsorship deals and increased SKY money must have took a large chunk of any outstanding debts (to the Lerner trust). It has all the hallmarks of preparing a business for sale in my opinion. It's like it's being hoovered for a new tenant.
Sorry Maz, but most of that is just wrong. Obviously I don't know exactly how the loans etc are structured, but just writing them off would have big tax implications for the trust. Also there hasn't been any reduction in the loans owed to the trust. The recent cost cutting is more about stopping the £40m+ losses the club has made for the last two years. From what a couple of people have said, I don't think we've even got to the point where the finances are back in order yet, even after the players sales and reduction in wages. Be interesting to see what the May 2011 accounts loke like when they come out.
-
How is it wrong? I didn't mean writing debt off entirely, just in terms of a sale. The Lerner trust has to be paid back of course.
But he could use money from elsewhere in his organisation to settle Villas debt. Its not Villa that have borrowed the money its Randy himself essentially. The settlement money he recieved recently for instance. There's nothing stopping him piling that straight back into the trust against what he has borrowed to finance Villa. That's the point, "we" dont owe him a penny because financially, "we" dont exist. Villa is an asset and responsibility of Lerner.
But whilst on that subject, the transfer situation of this year saw Villa pull in something like £20m, then you have the Genting money which I understand to be about £17-£20m and a reduced wage bill, the savings of which could also be redirected towards debt repayments. I reckon (and its just a guess) that any debts have been reduced significantly already. The speed of which has been suprising (to me) which leads me to conclude that either he is in major financial trouble or he's preparing the club for sale.
-
Maz, I bet you a shiny pound coin that the next set of accounts will have shown the debt increasing, not decreasing.
-
When do people think the Arabs will be unveiled? ;D
-
Maz, I bet you a shiny pound coin that the next set of accounts will have shown the debt increasing, not decreasing.
I can't see how that could be. So go on then.
-
By the way Iago. Where were those quotes from?
-
Maz, I bet you a shiny pound coin that the next set of accounts will have shown the debt increasing, not decreasing.
I can't see how that could be. So go on then.
The Next Accounts are to May 2011? So before a lot of the big earners were off the wage book and before we pulled about a £20 million profit on the summer's player trading (but after we spent the Bent money). It strikes me it's the May 2012 accounts that will be the interesting ones.
-
By the way Iago. Where were those quotes from?
Sport Witness forum. This is the guy apparently
(http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y221/trotski74/Avfc/RichArab.jpg)
Could be an interesting few weeks.
-
He looks like Matt Lucas complete with prosthetics ready to do a spoof football documentary.
-
Maz, I bet you a shiny pound coin that the next set of accounts will have shown the debt increasing, not decreasing.
I can't see how that could be. So go on then.
The Next Accounts are to May 2011? So before a lot of the big earners were off the wage book and before we pulled about a £20 million profit on the summer's player trading (but after we spent the Bent money). It strikes me it's the May 2012 accounts that will be the interesting ones.
Ah, in which case that swindler might have a quid off me.
I was talking of events since the summer which as you say, should be more illuminating.
-
He looks like Matt Lucas complete with prosthetics ready to do a spoof football documentary.
The picture symbolises the death of the game.
-
He looks like Matt Lucas complete with prosthetics ready to do a spoof football documentary.
The picture symbolises the death of the game.
He looks nothing like Murdoch but she could be Scudamore!
-
Maz, I bet you a shiny pound coin that the next set of accounts will have shown the debt increasing, not decreasing.
I can't see how that could be. So go on then.
The Next Accounts are to May 2011? So before a lot of the big earners were off the wage book and before we pulled about a £20 million profit on the summer's player trading (but after we spent the Bent money). It strikes me it's the May 2012 accounts that will be the interesting ones.
Ah, in which case that swindler might have a quid off me.
I was talking of events since the summer which as you say, should be more illuminating.
I don't think the May 2012 ones will be any different. In any case, the accounts always have a few post balance sheet events on them, which usually show when Lerner has increased the share capital or issued more loan notes. So the May 2011 accounts will give a good indication of the direction the debt is going in.
-
Lets hope the Qatari Petroleum consortium decide to come in for us :) :)
Wishful thinking i think. :(
-
All of this comes from a speculative article in The Daily Mail by Charles Sale. The article was basically relying on a source being referred to as 'friends' (of Lerner) saying he would accept a good offer if one was made. Who are the 'friends'? Well if they are that loose tongued, they may not be regarded by Randy as friends at all.
As for Charles Sale and the Daily Mail, well just listen to what is being said about the tabloids and the DM in particular at the Leveson Enquiry. Even the weather forecasts are suspect. Then there is Charles Sale, he hasn't had a good thing to say about Randy since the day he took over. There has been fairly constant sniping.
So, what’s the story worth? Well I am pretty happy in my house and do not intend selling it to anyone, but if someone made an offer of more than it was worth, I might just sell it. My friends would probably confirm that, if you rang them.
-
Lets hope the Qatari Petroleum consortium decide to come in for us :) :)
Wishful thinking i think. :(
Plenty of room behind the North Stand for a petrol station!
-
The last set of accounts showed Randy is owed £90m in loan notes and around £100m in equity.
We also lost over £40m which I can't see us turning around in one year despite player sales and the wage bill reducing.
Therefore it would take an offer of at least £250m, possibly closer to £300m, for Randy to break even (when factoring in the original purchase price).
At least that sort of figure would put off the asset strippers / pretend billionaires but there's no guarantee that the next owner wont leverage the money borrowed to buy the club against the club itself.
-
Read the article and knew it would be bollocks as soon as the words 'Daily' and 'Mail' appeared.
-
In fairness the Daily Mail didnt start the rumours. They haven't really said anything except that Randy might be tempted to sell if the right offer came in, which most of us agree would be likely anyway.
-
The Daily Mail are too busy telling us how we're all going to die next.
-
Sport Witness forum. This is the guy apparently
(http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y221/trotski74/Avfc/RichArab.jpg)
Could be an interesting few weeks.
[/quote]
Good looking fella and filthy rich to boot...is that Ronaldo standing next tom in a hat?
-
Has anybody heard or seen this rumour? You know what it's a small World, people say it all the time but is really is. I had the honour of attending some close friends wedding this weekend and who should appear at the at the reception? MM (not to be confused with MysteryMan), the man who worked at SkySportsNews, the man who's scatter gun approach to rumour flinging made him popular and despised in equal measure.
His life is going swimmingly, from dancing with Davina to recently being selected to host a pilot for a potential prime time terrestrial TV game show, so soon he could be a house hold name, but for now he shall remain as the one and only MM.
So after some severe ribbing about his hair cut and his new pose to hide the fact he's got a big chin, I tapped MM up for some of the media rumours around football... (remember these are journalistic or mystery tip-offs received by SkySportsNews, you must understand that they receive hundreds if not thousands of "tip-offs" everyday from people claiming to be in the know but are not able to quantify their information, but some of them are very, very good for a bit of rumour mongering. As much as people like to think SSN will put out any story on a whim, you must understand that every time they say "Sky Sports News understands..." that rumour has been through many, many pairs of hands and is only released to the news desk when the bosses are happy there is enough suggestive evidence.)
MM promised he would get in touch and get back to me, so this morning I check my e-mails and true to his word MM has forwarded an e-mail. For obvious reasons I can't show you the screen shot of the e-mail because it contains the information of both parties, however I will copy and paste the text. Interesting reading....
Hey Matt, as requested - Randy Lerner has contacted officials of Sheikh Hamad Bin Jassim Bin Jabr Al-Thani, you remember him right! Rumours have been that the Qatari's are looking at other Premier League clubs after being frustrated by a lack of movement at MU. This has prompted several chairman to contact the Sheikh's offices with the aim of raising interest in their club. Kenwright at Everton seem to have been rebuffed for reasons unknown.
However the latest club to make contact is Aston Villa, the source believes Lerner would be looking for £130-150m for the club, and the Qatari's are interested. The source (the same one who gave me Venkys) went on to say that several key factors play in to the hands of Aston Villa which makes them far more desirable than say Everton or Blackburn. Watch this space is all i can say, it would seem the horse has bolted and soon there will be another big player in the Premier League money stakes.
Hope that helps, catch up soon mate.
Interesting, I'm not going out and putting my house on the rumour, but it would certainly be an exciting time for Villa if it did happen.
I wonder what the "key factors" could be? Villa Park redevelopement?
I wonder if this is rumour mongering designed to make the Glaziers think again.....
The problem I see with this is the FFP... I don't see how they could come in to a club like Villa and turn us around like City have been... the process would have to be a slower one... but I suppose a few "sponsorship" (Qatari state sponsored of course ) deals would improve our turnover and spending power hugely...
I'd take that 'journalist' a bit more seriously if his written English wasn't so poor.
-
Has anybody heard or seen this rumour? You know what it's a small World, people say it all the time but is really is. I had the honour of attending some close friends wedding this weekend and who should appear at the at the reception? MM (not to be confused with MysteryMan), the man who worked at SkySportsNews, the man who's scatter gun approach to rumour flinging made him popular and despised in equal measure.
His life is going swimmingly, from dancing with Davina to recently being selected to host a pilot for a potential prime time terrestrial TV game show, so soon he could be a house hold name, but for now he shall remain as the one and only MM.
So after some severe ribbing about his hair cut and his new pose to hide the fact he's got a big chin, I tapped MM up for some of the media rumours around football... (remember these are journalistic or mystery tip-offs received by SkySportsNews, you must understand that they receive hundreds if not thousands of "tip-offs" everyday from people claiming to be in the know but are not able to quantify their information, but some of them are very, very good for a bit of rumour mongering. As much as people like to think SSN will put out any story on a whim, you must understand that every time they say "Sky Sports News understands..." that rumour has been through many, many pairs of hands and is only released to the news desk when the bosses are happy there is enough suggestive evidence.)
MM promised he would get in touch and get back to me, so this morning I check my e-mails and true to his word MM has forwarded an e-mail. For obvious reasons I can't show you the screen shot of the e-mail because it contains the information of both parties, however I will copy and paste the text. Interesting reading....
Hey Matt, as requested - Randy Lerner has contacted officials of Sheikh Hamad Bin Jassim Bin Jabr Al-Thani, you remember him right! Rumours have been that the Qatari's are looking at other Premier League clubs after being frustrated by a lack of movement at MU. This has prompted several chairman to contact the Sheikh's offices with the aim of raising interest in their club. Kenwright at Everton seem to have been rebuffed for reasons unknown.
However the latest club to make contact is Aston Villa, the source believes Lerner would be looking for £130-150m for the club, and the Qatari's are interested. The source (the same one who gave me Venkys) went on to say that several key factors play in to the hands of Aston Villa which makes them far more desirable than say Everton or Blackburn. Watch this space is all i can say, it would seem the horse has bolted and soon there will be another big player in the Premier League money stakes.
Hope that helps, catch up soon mate.
Interesting, I'm not going out and putting my house on the rumour, but it would certainly be an exciting time for Villa if it did happen.
I wonder what the "key factors" could be? Villa Park redevelopement?
I wonder if this is rumour mongering designed to make the Glaziers think again.....
The problem I see with this is the FFP... I don't see how they could come in to a club like Villa and turn us around like City have been... the process would have to be a slower one... but I suppose a few "sponsorship" (Qatari state sponsored of course ) deals would improve our turnover and spending power hugely...
I'd take that 'journalist' a bit more seriously if his written English wasn't so poor.
In fairness Dave, it's a rapidly dashed off e-mail not a published article
-
It's still got the sort of basic errors it's easier to not make than make.
-
(http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y221/trotski74/Avfc/RichArab.jpg)
That's an Indian Bernie Winters! eeeee Schnorbitz!
-
We need to be very very careful
We need someone who will be like Man City current owner rather than Blackburn or Liverpool previous owner and stay with the club like Roman or our beloved leader before Randy.
Oh the bright side we might be able to have an Robert Mancini type as our manager. But who ? If this means stopping our players moving to Manure or Man City that would be great.
Personally it is just fish and chips wrapping. Nothing worth reading.
-
Well the Qataris are taking sport very seriously indeed and there's a lot of competitive rivalry between these gulf states.
So here's hoping.
-
We need to be very very careful
We need someone who will be like Man City current owner rather than Blackburn or Liverpool previous owner and stay with the club like Roman or our beloved leader before Randy.
True. If they come into the club with ambition and a strategy to help us grow locally and globally, then I would be fully behind the takeover.
-
One Sheikh Hamad Bin Jassim Bin Jabr Al-Thani,
There's only one Sheikh Hamad Bin Jassim Bin Jabr Al-Thani,
has a certain ring to it?
-
One Sheikh Hamad Bin Jassim Bin Jabr Al-Thani,
There's only one Sheikh Hamad Bin Jassim Bin Jabr Al-Thani,
has a certain ring to it?
I think Id get a bit tired part way through the second verse. Can we shorten it to Sheikh Al.
-
bring him on i say. If someone can be found to buy a basket case club like Citeh then a club like Villa should have no problems
-
Well the Qataris are taking sport very seriously indeed and there's a lot of competitive rivalry between these gulf states.
So here's hoping.
It makes me sad that I'm really hoping that we do get bought by someone with this sort of money so that we can compete.
-
Lerner knew the score when he bought us. Buying a big premier league club is a huge ego trip and status symbol like buying a ferrari - and you don't buy one of them if you're worried about the running costs. If you can't afford it anymore you flog it off to someone who can. You don't devalue it by cutting down on the servicing and only putting in a tenner's worth of petrol so you're running on fumes.
-
Not sure I would be too happy with the idea of a Man City type ownership. I've spent too much time slagging them off about their owners haha
-
Initially I would prefer his cousin Sheikh Hamad Ibn Tamir Oman Nazir Tabil Hamood Ebran Califa Ibrahim Tamzir Younous.
-
We need to be very very careful
We need someone who will be like Man City current owner rather than Blackburn or Liverpool previous owner and stay with the club like Roman or our beloved leader before Randy.
True. If they come into the club with ambition and a strategy to help us grow locally and globally, then I would be fully behind the takeover.
An almost ideal scenario for me, and to tie this into another thread we have going on, would be a mega-rich owner like this who then brought in Sir Graham onto the board to run things. That way we balance money with experience and we're guaranteed the best interests on the club would be looked after.
-
Not sure I would be too happy with the idea of a Man City type ownership. I've spent too much time slagging them off about their owners haha
I'd find it difficult to trust them, I bet some of the City fans are actually bricking it for the day their owners get bored and fuck off leaving them in the shit.
-
Not sure I would be too happy with the idea of a Man City type ownership. I've spent too much time slagging them off about their owners haha
I'd find it difficult to trust them, I bet some of the City fans are actually bricking it for the day their owners get bored and fuck off leaving them in the shit.
I bet they're not. I bet they're too busy enjoying their moment in the sun, and who could blame them?
-
I don't blame them, not at all, hard not to be slightly envious. I'm just sceptical on how long term the City owners are. They'll probably prove me wrong and be there for a long time, but how they've started, by throwing tonnes of cash at it can't last forever, can it? The cash probably can, but they're interest might not.
-
So, are we saying that this may be more on the right side of a rumour than the wrong side?
-
Initially I would prefer his cousin Sheikh Hamad Ibn Tamir Oman Nazir Tabil Hamood Ebran Califa Ibrahim Tamzir Younous.
Very good :-)
-
I don't blame them, not at all, hard not to be slightly envious. I'm just sceptical on how long term the City owners are. They'll probably prove me wrong and be there for a long time, but how they've started, by throwing tonnes of cash at it can't last forever, can it? The cash probably can, but they're interest might not.
Fair point, however I know a couple of City fans and their attitude is pretty carefree as even if it all goes tits up then all that happens is they end up back at the level they were used to being at in the first place. And at least they will have had the memories, trophies, Champs League campaigns, and Derby Day drubbings to look back on. It's pretty much a no lose situation for them.
-
Initially I would prefer his cousin Sheikh Hamad Ibn Tamir Oman Nazir Tabil Hamood Ebran Califa Ibrahim Tamzir Younous.
Is that the Middle-Eastern equivalent of Algernon Winston Razzmattazz?
-
I'd hate it if the Qataris bought the club - we'd just be a new toy that would be dropped for something shinier in the future (probably ManUre) & we'd be actively accelerating the destruction of football as a sport.
I already detest Man City for what they've done to the game & couldn't stand it if we were the same.
-
I don't blame them, not at all, hard not to be slightly envious. I'm just sceptical on how long term the City owners are. They'll probably prove me wrong and be there for a long time, but how they've started, by throwing tonnes of cash at it can't last forever, can it? The cash probably can, but they're interest might not.
Fair point, however I know a couple of City fans and their attitude is pretty carefree as even if it all goes tits up then all that happens is they end up back at the level they were used to being at in the first place. And at least they will have had the memories, trophies, Champs League campaigns, and Derby Day drubbings to look back on. It's pretty much a no lose situation for them.
I'm not so sure as they were a mid table PL side when the oil money started rolling in and although it all depends on how the finance is structured, if they're left with a ridiculos wagebill they can't pay and debts to the owners, then they could easily 'do a Leeds'.
-
When do people think the Arabs will be unveiled? ;D
*snigger*
-
I don't blame them, not at all, hard not to be slightly envious. I'm just sceptical on how long term the City owners are. They'll probably prove me wrong and be there for a long time, but how they've started, by throwing tonnes of cash at it can't last forever, can it? The cash probably can, but they're interest might not.
Fair point, however I know a couple of City fans and their attitude is pretty carefree as even if it all goes tits up then all that happens is they end up back at the level they were used to being at in the first place. And at least they will have had the memories, trophies, Champs League campaigns, and Derby Day drubbings to look back on. It's pretty much a no lose situation for them.
I'm not so sure as they were a mid table PL side when the oil money started rolling in and although it all depends on how the finance is structured, if they're left with a ridiculos wagebill they can't pay and debts to the owners, then they could easily 'do a Leeds'.
Yeah I was going to say there is the potential for it much to be a 'lose' situation. It's all dependant on what structure they have in place.
-
bring him on i say. If someone can be found to buy a basket case club like Citeh then a club like Villa should have no problems
And if an arsehole the size of Garry Cook could manage it, again, we should have no problems.
-
Gary Cook was apparently more in tune with City fans than you'd think. I think it was WSC that wrote a surprisingly positive piece about him.
-
I think that says more about Mouthcunians than anything else, Dave.
-
No, he was a lot more genuine-fan-friendly than he was given credit for.
-
No, he was a lot more genuine-fan-friendly than he was given credit for.
Part of me thinks there was an element of Michael O'Leary syndrome about Cook. That is, coming out with outlandish, provacative statements just to gain notoriety and the accompanying attention for your company.
-
Manchester City have just announced annual losses of £197 million.
-
Manchester City have just announced annual losses of £197 million.
That's careless. When do the FFP rules kick in?
I think the theory goes that Man City are making hay before the FFP rules kick in. After that they will sell their surplus players (arguably) artificially increasing their turnover. In a way their strategy is pretty cunning because it will be nigh on impossible for a club to buy their way into the top four once the rules exist.
-
Manchester City have just announced annual losses of £197 million.
Have they looked down the back of the sofa?
-
Manchester City have just announced annual losses of £197 million.
That's careless. When do the FFP rules kick in?
I think the theory goes that Man City are making hay before the FFP rules kick in. After that they will sell their surplus players (arguably) artificially increasing their turnover. In a way their strategy is pretty cunning because it will be nigh on impossible for a club to buy their way into the top four once the rules exist.
That would only improve their financial results in the short term, eventually either their turnover would have to increase substantially or they find another loophole.
-
Oh well, maybe they can have their dugout seats sponsored for say... £200m?
-
No, he was a lot more genuine-fan-friendly than he was given credit for.
A mate of mine knows him well, grew up with him. Got us tickets in the posh seats and wined and dined avcouple of years ago and turned out he had about 30 guests from Birmingham for the night and looked after us well.
-
I think the theory goes that Man City are making hay before the FFP rules kick in. After that they will sell their surplus players (arguably) artificially increasing their turnover. In a way their strategy is pretty cunning because it will be nigh on impossible for a club to buy their way into the top four once the rules exist.
But with that, they'll still have to pay a huge amount towards their wages due to the ridiculous deals they've given out, which should mean they still operate at a loss. And I think many clubs will be to cute to pay them what the players areactually worth, so a load of loans is more likely.
-
After that they will sell their surplus players (arguably) artificially increasing their turnover. In a way their strategy is pretty cunning because it will be nigh on impossible for a club to buy their way into the top four once the rules exist.
Selling players doesn't increase turnover though. The only way selling players would help would be by getting the players off the wage bill, or selling them at a profit to help their overall profitability.
-
There's an interview with Lerner about his commitment to Villa in tomorrow's Times apparently.
-
Interesting for somebody who is very private.
-
After that they will sell their surplus players (arguably) artificially increasing their turnover. In a way their strategy is pretty cunning because it will be nigh on impossible for a club to buy their way into the top four once the rules exist.
Selling players doesn't increase turnover though. The only way selling players would help would be by getting the players off the wage bill, or selling them at a profit to help their overall profitability.
The way I thought it worked was say Adebayor was sold after the rules kick in for say 10m then that would increase their turnover for that season meaning they can spend more in wages. The fact he was purchased prior to the rules will not matter. Is that not right then?
I agree it is a short term move but they'll have solidified their place in the chumps league by then and possibly gained a few extra fans.
-
There's an interview with Lerner about his commitment to Villa in tomorrow's Times apparently.
I heard from someone at the club that he gives one press interview a year. This is probay it.
I wonder if as it's with The Times that's why Charles Sale at the Daily Mail had a go the other day?
-
Not my favourite place to get Villa news but this has a fair bit on tomorrows article:
http://astonvilla-views.com/2011/11/18/spend-what-you-can-afford-football-is-not-philanthropy-avfc/
-
Initially I would prefer his cousin Sheikh Hamad Ibn Tamir Oman Nazir Tabil Hamood Ebran Califa Ibrahim Tamzir Younous.
Nahaa...Sheikh Hamad ibn Tamir Oman is his half brother. You are confused with Sheikh Hamid bin Hahd who is his cousin.
-
Either way I can't see his name on the back of many replica shirts.
-
http://www.expressandstar.com/uk/uk-sport/2011/11/19/lerner-committed-to-villa/
-
No, he was a lot more genuine-fan-friendly than he was given credit for.
A mate of mine knows him well, grew up with him. Got us tickets in the posh seats and wined and dined avcouple of years ago and turned out he had about 30 guests from Birmingham for the night and looked after us well.
On the other side of the "hasn't forgot his roots" coin is the comment I have heard about him being ecstatic when they signed Barry, not so much because of the player they'd bought, but rather because of of the fact he'd shafted 'The Vile'. On that basis he probably needed to lie down for a week after he got Milner.
-
After that they will sell their surplus players (arguably) artificially increasing their turnover. In a way their strategy is pretty cunning because it will be nigh on impossible for a club to buy their way into the top four once the rules exist.
Selling players doesn't increase turnover though. The only way selling players would help would be by getting the players off the wage bill, or selling them at a profit to help their overall profitability.
The way I thought it worked was say Adebayor was sold after the rules kick in for say 10m then that would increase their turnover for that season meaning they can spend more in wages. The fact he was purchased prior to the rules will not matter. Is that not right then?
I agree it is a short term move but they'll have solidified their place in the chumps league by then and possibly gained a few extra fans.
No. As said above, the sold player comes off the 'intangible assets' register and any profit / loss on the sale is then booked to the p&l account. Additionally, obviously, the salary comes off the wages bill.
-
Does anyone really expect clubs like Man City to abide by the rules? Rich people always find ways around rules, and this will be no different.
-
There's an interview with Lerner about his commitment to Villa in tomorrow's Times apparently.
Given the 'pay-for view' and the difficulty I experienced downloading a link above, I thought I'd share a few extracts here. Put up against the criticisms of Man City's approach and various others it does seem to be the case that a hardened sports journalist (and they're well'ard!) thinks we have a treasure! I'm off to get my tattoo...
Matt Dickinson:
He is the same “custodian” (one of his favourite words) who bought a business to build rather than drain for profit. He talks, almost wistfully, about the FA’s old Rule 34, which restricted what any director could take out of a club and enshrined the role almost as a public service.
Almost quaintly in an age of profiteering from football, he quotes Frederick Rinder, the chairman from 1898 to 1925 who saw Villa as a flagship of the Midlands community: “Finance is important but we must never forget that we are not talking about a mere business.”
and
Randy Lerner pulls up his trouser leg. And there it is, the lion rampant from the Aston Villa badge in blue outline etched on the inside of his right ankle. If he were given to tacky gestures, or perhaps the owner of Newcastle United, Lerner might allow a photograph of his tattoo as a way of demonstrating to jittery Villa fans that his passion cannot just be washed away.
Reassurance is craved as rumours swirl that Lerner’s interest has waned or even that he might sell up. The speculation leaves him bemused.
Are you still committed? “Yes”.
Can you envisage selling? “No.” Not in any circumstances? “Not unless it’s something to do with the kids, news you could never expect.”
and
He cherishes Villa and insists that his passion has grown deeper since he bought the club in 2006, believing that they had potential to grow in England’s second city. (The idea that he fell in love with the 1982 European champions when he studied at Cambridge is a Wikipedia myth.) But he wants Villa to pay their way, which is why he spends most of his time on the “hidden parts that don’t get applause”, including plans for a new North Stand that could raise capacity to 50,000.
And why should it be any different than “organic growth” unless any Villa fans know a sheikh or oligarch willing to buy success at any cost? In these days when so many football owners are rightly treated with mistrust, isn’t there a lot to be said for good intentions and a man who can quote Fred Rinder?
-
Over an entire two pages of The Times, the actual bit where Lerner says something is about 4 lines.
-
Talk is cheap. People would be more re-assured if we didn't currently have a smaller squad than before he took over.
-
Actually, I counted 45! (But then I'm a bit literal.) And, as you say, a lot of reported conversation.
He does acknowledge that he's more of a 'doer' and describes himself as an 'undercommunicator' in his role as owner of the club.
Interesting emphasis on 'learning the lessons' from Leeds Utd, and comments about the last year from MON's walkout through the difficulties of last season to the present which I haven't read before. There's also a comment about needing to change the perception that more players have gone than arrived. Good luck with that one!
-
Leeds United analogy used again. What excuse are we going to use when Leeds are back competing with us in the Premier League?
-
Leeds United analogy used again. What excuse are we going to use when Leeds are back competing with us in the Premier League?
We will use the Leeds analogy.
-
After that they will sell their surplus players (arguably) artificially increasing their turnover. In a way their strategy is pretty cunning because it will be nigh on impossible for a club to buy their way into the top four once the rules exist.
Selling players doesn't increase turnover though. The only way selling players would help would be by getting the players off the wage bill, or selling them at a profit to help their overall profitability.
The way I thought it worked was say Adebayor was sold after the rules kick in for say 10m then that would increase their turnover for that season meaning they can spend more in wages. The fact he was purchased prior to the rules will not matter. Is that not right then?
I agree it is a short term move but they'll have solidified their place in the chumps league by then and possibly gained a few extra fans.
No. As said above, the sold player comes off the 'intangible assets' register and any profit / loss on the sale is then booked to the p&l account. Additionally, obviously, the salary comes off the wages bill.
Apologies for taking this off topic, especially when Randy has muttered a few words, but I still don't understand this. If for example Man City signed Messi for 100m then their 'intangible assets' would increase because
they have a new asset - a players. if you ignore Messi's wages (as a life long City fan, he will play for free) then the p+l will remain unchanged, therefore under the FFP rules they could still break even despite spending 100m on one player?
-
Thing is we can't compete against the likes of Man U, Chelsea, Liverpool & Arsenal in terms of turnover nor against Man City due their owners wealth. The sight of 50,000 Chelsea shirts in Hong Kong tells me in the current climate we have a mountain to climb, especially if our attendances keep falling.
So do we compete by trying to buy (borrow) our way in; with no guarantee of success; do we build a sustainable club or do we hope for a new richer owner? One thing is certain whichever one some people will complain anyway. Eck was appointed, in my opinion, in an attempt to contain expectations, we will not be in a position to compete for the top 6 anytime soon.
Despite what some believe, we have no divine right to be in the top 6. History, tradition nor location is no longer a passage way to success (ref Chelsea & Man City). The only options are investing vast sums of money (which we don't generate & our owner doesn't have) or putting the foundations in place to gradually build success as a well run club. Our only current option is to go for the latter, fans look from week to week and season to season. The club needs to look more long term than that. When we have consistency & the structures are in place then success will follow.
When we are all long gone, Aston Villa will still be here.
-
So do we compete by trying to buy (borrow) our way in; with no guarantee of success; do we build a sustainable club or do we hope for a new richer owner? One thing is certain whichever one some people will complain anyway. Eck was appointed, in my opinion, in an attempt to contain expectations, we will not be in a position to compete for the top 6 anytime soon.
We NEED to be competing with the top six, and a club of our stature should rightly be in a position to do so. I am sick of this negative attitude that we cannot compete. I hope Randy studies William McGregor, and how he took the club seriously in a competitive sense, but I guess he is still listening to senile Doug for advice.
-
Spot on Iago. We need to be competing for the biggest prizes full stop. Aston Villa weren't formed to make up the numbers.
-
So do we compete by trying to buy (borrow) our way in; with no guarantee of success; do we build a sustainable club or do we hope for a new richer owner? One thing is certain whichever one some people will complain anyway. Eck was appointed, in my opinion, in an attempt to contain expectations, we will not be in a position to compete for the top 6 anytime soon.
We NEED to be competing with the top six, and a club of our stature should rightly be in a position to do so. I am sick of this negative attitude that we cannot compete. I hope Randy studies William McGregor, and how he took the club seriously in a competitive sense, but I guess he is still listening to senile Doug for advice.
Stature, history and how we perceive our club currently count for nothing, money buys success. Is there a a magic formula that enables us to compete on a consistent basis, with our current levels of turnover and debt, against clubs with vastly greater resources than us? I think not, but if the foundations and the right manager are in place (not Mcleish, although I like the man) I think at some point we will. I just don't think we can do it at the moment.
Club Turnover (£ms) 2010
Arsenal 382
Manchester United 286
Chelsea 213
Liverpool 185
Manchester City 125
Tottenham Hotspur 119
Aston Villa 91
Everton 79
-
Spot on Iago. We need to be competing for the biggest prizes full stop. Aston Villa weren't formed to make up the numbers.
Over the last 30 years for all but a few years, that's exactly what we have been doing, making up the numbers. Saying we need to compete is alright it's how are we going to do it, given the odds that are against us?
-
Does anyone really expect clubs like Man City to abide by the rules? Rich people always find ways around rules, and this will be no different.
Rules are for the middle classes. The rich always find a way around them and the poor never get close to breaking them. So I am afraid we have to "uphold" the rules as there is nothing else.
-
We NEED to be competing with the top six, and a club of our stature should rightly be in a position to do so. I am sick of this negative attitude that we cannot compete. I hope Randy studies William McGregor, and how he took the club seriously in a competitive sense, but I guess he is still listening to senile Doug for advice.
Well said and I for one will never give up the hope.
-
Spot on Iago. We need to be competing for the biggest prizes full stop. Aston Villa weren't formed to make up the numbers.
Over the last 30 years for all but a few years, that's exactly what we have been doing, making up the numbers. Saying we need to compete is alright it's how are we going to do it, given the odds that are against us?
How do you compete? Well you focus on your own product; we have a lot going for us, we are the biggest club in England's second city, we have great infrastructure and unique history. We have many qualities already in place to be hugely successful.
What we do not have is a forward thinker on the board, somebody who is going to be aggressive and grow our fan base and business. Randy has the right sentiments, but is really idealistic and seems ignorant about the modern game. It is sad to say, but it is not 1874 anymore, this game is huge business now.
Would any credible business hire the guy who has failed with a rival? Does a great owner alienate a club's fan base?
Randy needs to be consistent with his plans for the club, and do a lot better in the future.
-
Stature, history and how we perceive our club currently count for nothing, money buys success. Is there a a magic formula that enables us to compete on a consistent basis, with our current levels of turnover and debt, against clubs with vastly greater resources than us? I think not, but if the foundations and the right manager are in place (not Mcleish, although I like the man) I think at some point we will. I just don't think we can do it at the moment.
Club Turnover (£ms) 2010
Arsenal 382
Manchester United 286
Chelsea 213
Liverpool 185
Manchester City 125
Tottenham Hotspur 119
Aston Villa 91
Everton 79
Good data John - slightly misleading to show the Arse with a £384m t/over that includes £156m of property development (presumably the benefits accruing from Highbury). But the benefit of having a London-based stadium with a 60k capacity is clear: they earn nearly 4x our gate receipts. And we're adrift of the likes of Spppppppppppurrrrrrrs and Liverpool.
Iago: we may feel we ought to be competing but I endorse John's point - it's all about the £££.
McMinge is here to develop the club slowly-surely; 'cos we have no silver bullet (i.e. money). So, get the youth academy working even more effectively and develop players that can come through - either for sale or for delivering us some success (or a combination of both). We have to be thinking long-term 'cos short-term is going to be just underwhelming.
-
I think Iago has hit the nail on the head describing Randy as an "idealist" and to be honest I like his vision for the club, self sustaining and of good moral calibre. However where he fails (currently) is getting people in who can deliver this vision. Most clubs of our size seem to have a hands on owner or CEO business type AND a football person. Whereas we have randy who in his own words is quite removed from the day to day stuff and Faulkner.
Faulkner is an easy target but I don't think there is a man on this planet who could successfully manage and grow the whole club on their own.
-
Spot on Iago. We need to be competing for the biggest prizes full stop. Aston Villa weren't formed to make up the numbers.
Yes we were.
-
Does anyone really expect clubs like Man City to abide by the rules? Rich people always find ways around rules, and this will be no different.
Rules are for the middle classes. The rich always find a way around them and the poor never get close to breaking them. So I am afraid we have to "uphold" the rules as there is nothing else.
OK, I've had a few beers, but don't know what that is upposed to mean.
-
The simple trurh is Randy threw his money at us but he backed the wrong manager. Yes we got results, yes we finished top 6 three times but we never really advanced as a football team - in marketing terms, the product was crap. It's not his fault, you have to go back to Sir Brian to find an entertaining Villa side. I'm sure most Villa fans wouldn't complain if we were finishing 6th, 7th, 8th or 9th if were were worth watching.
Looking at the last 35 years, only Saunders, BFR and Sir Brian have managed to get us playing to a decent standard, which makes Randy's managerial appointments so disappointing, he completely missed the point. Find somebody that will get the Villa, especially at Villa Park, playing attacking, bums off seats progressive football. It just appears we're going round in circles and it's only the die hards that bother to turn up.
Maybe Martinez wasn't such a bad idea but any new manager needs to be supported if you want him to change the footballing culture at Villa Park. For me, McLeish is just MON without the money. Decent chap that he is, he's never going to revolutionise the way we play and when you look around the PL, there are plenty of teams that are trying to play 21st century football. I just wish, 11 years in, we were one of that group.
-
If Alex need to do something he need to follow what work for Sir Alex and make free flowing attacking football like Manchester United for Aston Villa.
-
Talk is cheap. People would be more re-assured if we didn't currently have a smaller squad than before he took over.
Entirely predictable from you, Greg. When he doesn't say anything you moan because he's not communicating, when he does "talk is cheap".
-
So do we compete by trying to buy (borrow) our way in; with no guarantee of success; do we build a sustainable club or do we hope for a new richer owner? One thing is certain whichever one some people will complain anyway. Eck was appointed, in my opinion, in an attempt to contain expectations, we will not be in a position to compete for the top 6 anytime soon.
We NEED to be competing with the top six, and a club of our stature should rightly be in a position to do so. I am sick of this negative attitude that we cannot compete. I hope Randy studies William McGregor, and how he took the club seriously in a competitive sense, but I guess he is still listening to senile Doug for advice.
What's our stature? A club that has won the league once in our lifetimes and averages around 33k for home games. We've got a fantastic history but haven't been Dining at the top table for a long time. We have no god given right, we have to work for it.
-
What's our stature? A club that has won the league once in our lifetimes and averages around 33k for home games. We've got a fantastic history but haven't been Dining at the top table for a long time. We have no god given right, we have to work for it.
I know we have no right to be at the top, but we have the right to TRY. If you read my post again you will understand better.
-
What's our stature? A club that has won the league once in our lifetimes and averages around 33k for home games. We've got a fantastic history but haven't been Dining at the top table for a long time. We have no god given right, we have to work for it.
I know we have no right to be at the top, but we have the right to TRY. If you read my post again you will understand better.
Don't be so fucking patronising.
I understood it perfectly well, even the tasteless insult of Doug, but it's meaningless. We all know that the only way to implement the sort of quick fix you seem to want is through spending. The approach Lerner appears to be taking takes time and patience.
-
What's our stature? A club that has won the league once in our lifetimes and averages around 33k for home games. We've got a fantastic history but haven't been Dining at the top table for a long time. We have no god given right, we have to work for it.
I know we have no right to be at the top, but we have the right to TRY. If you read my post again you will understand better.
Don't be so fucking patronising.
I understood it perfectly well, even the tasteless insult of Doug, but it's meaningless. We all know that the only way to implement the sort of quick fix you seem to want is through spending. The approach Lerner appears to be taking takes time and patience.
Yet did I say it was a quick fix? I am willing to be patient, but waiting is no guarantee for any success.
Do you believe AM can progress our playing style in the next few years and bring us success? I do not, unless it is spending a lot of money of course.
I am sure Doug can cope with my insult. BTW I was not trying to patronise you. I genuinely think you are mistaken about my point of view, and simply giving me the generic money answer is ridiculous.
-
giving me the generic money answer is ridiculous.
Not ridiculous; largely true in the current environment.
Which other club is genuinely competing for trophies (along with which comes attendances, merchandising sales, status, kids in the home counties wanting our shirts, etc) other than those with dosh? - sure, the FAC may spin off some surprising and welcome finalists, but the regular pursuit of honours remains with those with lucre. And of course the real filthy readies come from regular participation in the Chumps Lge - England's participants being virtually a closed shop at the present time.
Desperately sad, but a fact.
We do have to compete - but it will be a long-term project; hopefully emanating from a well-constructed business / club strategy, delivered by the best people RL can put in the top jobs and including a total commitment to youth academy leadership and excellence in playing standards, win or lose.
-
We do have to compete - but it will be a long-term project; hopefully emanating from a well-constructed business / club strategy, delivered by the best people RL can put in the top jobs and including a total commitment to youth academy leadership and excellence in playing standards, win or lose.
I accept and share that belief. But I do not trust the board to carry us forward.
-
We do have to compete - but it will be a long-term project; hopefully emanating from a well-constructed business / club strategy, delivered by the best people RL can put in the top jobs and including a total commitment to youth academy leadership and excellence in playing standards, win or lose.
I accept and share that belief. But I do not trust the board to carry us forward.
Ah,, well that's a different matter; but there is some evidence that they have invested in the heritage and club values. Maybe not enough but they do not appear either rapacious or ambivalent.
-
What's our stature? A club that has won the league once in our lifetimes and averages around 33k for home games. We've got a fantastic history but haven't been Dining at the top table for a long time. We have no god given right, we have to work for it.
I know we have no right to be at the top, but we have the right to TRY. If you read my post again you will understand better.
Don't be so fucking patronising.
I understood it perfectly well, even the tasteless insult of Doug, but it's meaningless. We all know that the only way to implement the sort of quick fix you seem to want is through spending. The approach Lerner appears to be taking takes time and patience.
As I've said before, it's not "an approach" it's the actions of a hopeless businessman who has spent too much money and hasn't got a plan b.
-
What's our stature? A club that has won the league once in our lifetimes and averages around 33k for home games. We've got a fantastic history but haven't been Dining at the top table for a long time. We have no god given right, we have to work for it.
I know we have no right to be at the top, but we have the right to TRY. If you read my post again you will understand better.
Don't be so fucking patronising.
I understood it perfectly well, even the tasteless insult of Doug, but it's meaningless. We all know that the only way to implement the sort of quick fix you seem to want is through spending. The approach Lerner appears to be taking takes time and patience.
As I've said before, it's not "an approach" it's the actions of a hopeless businessman who has spent too much money and hasn't got a plan b.
I think that's harsh.
For five years we were telling everyone who would listen how we had the best Chairman in the land on account of him running an open chequebook whilst staying out of the limelight.
If anything, he's already on Plan B. Plan A was to spend a couple of hundred million on getting us in to the Champions League - that didn't work so now he's on to Plan B; building up from the bottom on a much more sustainable cost base.
I don't think you can begrudge him making this change - how many other people are out there willing to pump £200m in to the club?
-
Yet another sad indictment of the 21st Century world.
Success has to happen now or it's not worth having.
It takes time to build a long term successful team either in business or sport.
All you people living in the ' I want it now and at any cost' world are sadly deluded. Would you be happy to see our owner throw silly money at the transfer market for the sake of a couple of years being bracketed in the so called 'Sky Big Four' at the risk that it couldn't be sustained and our club would be back in the position that we were in the late 1960's early 70's?
I don't recall any Villa fans doing cart wheels down New St. when Mr. Saunders was appointed. Yet the man was given the time and space to develop the squad that he wanted, and that's what's needed now. Patience from the fans and the board will pay off in the not too distant future.
A few on here would do well to follow Randy's advice and read the Leeds United manual on how to ruin a football club.
Keep The Faith.
-
If making huge losses, selling our best players and appointing the likes of Houllier and McLeish is "building" something then I don't want to see the finished product.
-
The problem is I don't think in this day and age we can build up organically as we seem to want. It's a sad indictment of the modern game that these days you need to make £200million losses and spend millions on wages to get success.
I also don't really see the appointment of McLeish as consistent with this aim. He's not a manager who has built success organically at clubs or brought through too many young players. He's a manager who can work to a shoestring buying reasonable, solid performers from the bargain basement.
Don't get me wrong. I want us to build something. I'm just not sure we're going the right way about it at this point in time. The great failing of the Martin O'Neill era was that we failed to actually succeed in this. Towards the end of O'Neill's reign we started to look at the short term rather than the long term. Now we seem to be returning to this but with a lot less money.
-
And going back to the OP, 99.99% of people across all walks of life woluld sell if the right offer is made.
I mean, I love my house and have absolutely no intention to move, but if someone knocked on the door now and offered me a million quid for it I'd be on the phone to the removal men first thing in the morning.
This all seems to be a bit of a non-story.
-
Risso, would you be happy to see us keep hold of our so called 'best' players even though they obviously didn't want to play for us? Could you trust those players to give 100% to the club?
As far as I'm concerned our 'best' players are those that want to play for AVFC come what may.
As for massive debt. Our debts are minuscule compared to a lot of PL clubs.... especially compared to those clubs that some on here want us to emulate. Despite all the assurances from the PL and elsewhere, I believe that there are one or two Leeds Uniteds lurking in the background.
As for Alex McLeish, like I said in my post (and in other threads) Mr. Saunders was given time, and I believe that if AM is given the same sort of latitude he will come up with the goods.
-
Risso, would you be happy to see us keep hold of our so called 'best' players even though they obviously didn't want to play for us? Could you trust those players to give 100% to the club?
As far as I'm concerned our 'best' players are those that want to play for AVFC come what may.
As for massive debt. Our debts are minuscule compared to a lot of PL clubs.... especially compared to those clubs that some on here want us to emulate. Despite all the assurances from the PL and elsewhere, I believe that there are one or two Leeds Uniteds lurking in the background.
As for Alex McLeish, like I said in my post (and in other threads) Mr. Saunders was given time, and I believe that if AM is given the same sort of latitude he will come up with the goods.
Our debt is huge compared to our turnover. Who is it that you think is going to do a Leeds?
-
Risso, would you be happy to see us keep hold of our so called 'best' players even though they obviously didn't want to play for us? Could you trust those players to give 100% to the club?
As far as I'm concerned our 'best' players are those that want to play for AVFC come what may.
As for massive debt. Our debts are minuscule compared to a lot of PL clubs.... especially compared to those clubs that some on here want us to emulate. Despite all the assurances from the PL and elsewhere, I believe that there are one or two Leeds Uniteds lurking in the background.
As for Alex McLeish, like I said in my post (and in other threads) Mr. Saunders was given time, and I believe that if AM is given the same sort of latitude he will come up with the goods.
Our debt is huge compared to our turnover. Who is it that you think is going to do a Leeds?
Rangers if their court case goes against them.
-
Risso, would you be happy to see us keep hold of our so called 'best' players even though they obviously didn't want to play for us? Could you trust those players to give 100% to the club?
As far as I'm concerned our 'best' players are those that want to play for AVFC come what may.
As for massive debt. Our debts are minuscule compared to a lot of PL clubs.... especially compared to those clubs that some on here want us to emulate. Despite all the assurances from the PL and elsewhere, I believe that there are one or two Leeds Uniteds lurking in the background.
As for Alex McLeish, like I said in my post (and in other threads) Mr. Saunders was given time, and I believe that if AM is given the same sort of latitude he will come up with the goods.
Our debt is huge compared to our turnover. Who is it that you think is going to do a Leeds?
Rangers if their court case goes against them.
The rags, fingers crossed.
-
I don't think that the Scottish Premier league is what he meant.
-
Is it even possible to build something from the ground up without also investing huge amounts of money?
You end up with decent players like Milner, Downing, Young, and they fuck off to CL clubs because you haven't done it all in the space of a couple of years.
Greed and money renders it impossible, unfortunately.
-
If making huge losses, selling our best players and appointing the likes of Houllier and McLeish is "building" something then I don't want to see the finished product.
Just out of interest, Risso, as a financial wizard, what would you have done differently?
-
If making huge losses, selling our best players and appointing the likes of Houllier and McLeish is "building" something then I don't want to see the finished product.
Just out of interest, Risso, as a financial wizard, what would you have done differently?
I think the biggest mistake Lerner has madewas just letting O'Neill spend whatever he liked. It appears now that their working relationship such as it was consisted of O'Neill being given free rein, then with Lerner belatedly realising how utterly fucking stupid some of the decisions being made were, an attempt at bringing things back into line was met with a flounce and a resignation. Lerner must have known roughly how much he had earmarked to spend on transfers on wages, so while I wouldn't expect him to have in depth knowledge of the transfer market, surely even he should have carefully considered the wisdom of paying a 31 year old non-scoring centre forward £65k a week on a three year contract. Say Lerner has spent £130m on wages and transfers since joining, Emile Heskey will have accounted for 10% of that. Absolute insanity.
-
If making huge losses, selling our best players and appointing the likes of Houllier and McLeish is "building" something then I don't want to see the finished product.
Just out of interest, Risso, as a financial wizard, what would you have done differently?
I think the biggest mistake Lerner has madewas just letting O'Neill spend whatever he liked. It appears now that their working relationship such as it was consisted of O'Neill being given free rein, then with Lerner belatedly realising how utterly fucking stupid some of the decisions being made were, an attempt at bringing things back into line was met with a flounce and a resignation. Lerner must have known roughly how much he had earmarked to spend on transfers on wages, so while I wouldn't expect him to have in depth knowledge of the transfer market, surely even he should have carefully considered the wisdom of paying a 31 year old non-scoring centre forward £65k a week on a three year contract. Say Lerner has spent £130m on wages and transfers since joining, Emile Heskey will have accounted for 10% of that. Absolute insanity.
You can't blame Lerner for not supporting his manager. How many managers would buy players and refuse to play them? Once he realised so many players were on huge salaries, long contracts and doing next to nothing, he obviously stepped in. How many managers think they are accountable to nobody? I'm sure Randy was hearing great things about our youth players but we may as well of not bothered with an Academy if the players are not to be used. Imagine how he feels about Cahill being linked all summer with Arsenal, now Barca and watching him play for England. Add to that the poor return on investment, players either leaving for a fraction of what we paid for them or seating out their contracts and leaving for nothing. I'm not even going to mention the dull football served up from the 1970's.
So as a finance chap, what would you do? Keep pumping money (debt) into the club? Could he try and increase revenue, if so how?
-
There just doesn't seem to have been any sort of budgeting or control of cash going out. To make £40m losses two years running is just extraordinary. Surely the alarm bells should have started ringing when having spent a fortune on the likes of Davies and Cuellar, Randy was then asked to stump up for an entirely new defence 12 months later.
-
And when the brakes were finally put on, the manager walked.
-
And when the brakes were finally put on, the manager walked.
That's what I said above. As I say, the alarm bells should have been ringing long before we got to that stage. The £10m wasted on Harewood would have had me keeping an extremely close eye on O'Neill from that point on. The trouble probably stems from the fact that O'Neill was appointed in a hurry with a level of input from Lerner that's open to debate, before he knew anything at all about English football.
-
Much as I loathe him, I would hardly say appointing O'Neill was a mistake.
-
There just doesn't seem to have been any sort of budgeting or control of cash going out. To make £40m losses two years running is just extraordinary. Surely the alarm bells should have started ringing when having spent a fortune on the likes of Davies and Cuellar, Randy was then asked to stump up for an entirely new defence 12 months later.
So true but I get the impression the alarm bells were sounding after we bought the new defence, just look at the January window for evidence. It could be argued that Carlos was shipped out to right back to justify the investment, obviously nobody could count on the injuries to Fred and Laursen, so they had to be replaced but for me, it's the lack of an experienced footballing man on the board that concerns me more about Randy's management.
I think his hands are tied regarding increasing the revenue. Ticket prices can't go up without an uproar and despite improving our commercial revenue, it's limited due to the demographics of our fan base, at least whilst we're let's say, erm, not very exciting to watch. There is no easy solution and I'd imagine you would be one of the first in line to shout out he needs to reduce our debt.
Unless of course you have a cunning plan?
-
There just doesn't seem to have been any sort of budgeting or control of cash going out. To make £40m losses two years running is just extraordinary. Surely the alarm bells should have started ringing when having spent a fortune on the likes of Davies and Cuellar, Randy was then asked to stump up for an entirely new defence 12 months later.
It was obviously a calculated gamble on us making the CL and the increased revenue that would bring. The problem was a combination of Man City inflating the market and the recession changed the landscape. It's easy to say with hindsight that it was wrong but I don't remember too many people demanding he spend less.
-
And when the brakes were finally put on, the manager walked.
That's what I said above. As I say, the alarm bells should have been ringing long before we got to that stage. The £10m wasted on Harewood would have had me keeping an extremely close eye on O'Neill from that point on.
If you can name me one manager that has never bought a dud, I'll agree with you on that one. Unless you're Chelsea or Man City, every club has to play the law of averages regarding transfers.
-
Risso, would you be happy to see us keep hold of our so called 'best' players even though they obviously didn't want to play for us? Could you trust those players to give 100% to the club?
As far as I'm concerned our 'best' players are those that want to play for AVFC come what may.
As for massive debt. Our debts are minuscule compared to a lot of PL clubs.... especially compared to those clubs that some on here want us to emulate. Despite all the assurances from the PL and elsewhere, I believe that there are one or two Leeds Uniteds lurking in the background.
As for Alex McLeish, like I said in my post (and in other threads) Mr. Saunders was given time, and I believe that if AM is given the same sort of latitude he will come up with the goods.
Our debt is huge compared to our turnover. Who is it that you think is going to do a Leeds?
I can't give you any of the so called top four,five or six. But the likes of QPR who seem to be spending a lot of money on fairly average players in their scramble for a premier league place seems to me to be misguided. And once Daniel Levy realises that in spite of his admirable stance on keeping his best players despite the silly money offered was a waste of time, I can see Spurs sinking like a stone.
But there again like everyone else on here I'm a football fan.....and what do we know?
-
And when the brakes were finally put on, the manager walked.
That's what I said above. As I say, the alarm bells should have been ringing long before we got to that stage. The £10m wasted on Harewood would have had me keeping an extremely close eye on O'Neill from that point on. The trouble probably stems from the fact that O'Neill was appointed in a hurry with a level of input from Lerner that's open to debate, before he knew anything at all about English football.
Trouble is, we don't know what type of conversations occurred before the purchases of Warnock, Dunne and Collins -whether this was agreed to on the understanding that we'd gone over budget and that players would have to be moved on.
I'd still like to think RL knew he was taking a calculated gamble at this point, that going over budget and backing a highly rated manager (at that time) was better than putting his nose out of joint and effectively having to start the project again from scratch. Lets not forget MON's stock was still very high that stage. We'd spent the bulk of the previous season in the top 4. And the latter option would still involve spending money anyway- so better, they might have reasoned to let MON finish the job he started.
As for the deals that didn't work out, we all know the worst ones. Harewood, Heskey and Beye will still be figures of fun in 10 years I'd wager.
But on balance I would say MON's transfer dealings were more hit than miss- perhaps not strictly on a numbers basis, but on the contribution his best deals made for the money spent. It would also disappoint me if the board were to use the convenient excuse of a number of failed transfers in the past as reason enough to pull the drawbridge up and stop competing for the foreseeable.
Liverpool had the likes of Jovanovic, Kochensky and Poulson on big wages for very little return. They didn't use being stung on those deals as a reason not to compete anymore.
-
Risso, many of your posts seem to be based on hindsight. Can you point me in the direction of all the posts you made saying we spent too much money and gave O'Neill too much control dating back to before the big girl walked out? Not having a go just interested to know if you predicted our demise as I seem to remember most Villa fans saying No Deal should have complete control like Saunders used to at the time.
-
We can debate the pros and cons of MONs transfer dealings until the end of time, and knowing H&V we probably will, but ultimately as a manager he'll point to the results on the pitch as justification.
Where it started to go wrong was that we needed a step up in class to make that final jump to being a CL side, but he was either unwilling or unable to do that. Money wise there was enough there to do it, if we had used the kids to flesh out other areas of the squad. Was Sidwell any better than Gardner the Elder? Beye better than Lichaj?
So may the time was right, if not the actual timing, for him to move on and someone else to put the icing on the cake he made. And there the board starts to come in for some justified criticism and Houller was never going to be that man. AM seems to me a 'back to basics' answer to keep us solid and out of danger, but if/when the present financial situation turns in our favour, as in the high earnering poor performers have gone, then we either get back to Randy's early days of player investment, only this time with a bit of a better idea of things, or continue to tread water as the money needed to compete is outside or menas, so why bother trying?
-
"Liverpool had the likes of Jovanovic, Kochensky and Poulson on big wages for very little return. They didn't use being stung on those deals as a reason not to compete anymore."
No they go bought by new owners who then spent even more money.
-
"Liverpool had the likes of Jovanovic, Kochensky and Poulson on big wages for very little return. They didn't use being stung on those deals as a reason not to compete anymore."
No they go bought by new owners who then spent even more money.
Sorry to strike a note of business reality here. I have never considered Liverpool to be that much bigger than us in England, and at various times over the last 30 or so years we have given them a run for their money to try and overtake them.
However, in global terms Liverpool do have a bigger following than us. Unfortunately, big clubs revenue streams now are probably more influenced by global brand awareness and TV coverage abroad rather than how many you get through the turnstile. Horrible business speak language I know but thats what decides who you can buy and what wages you can afford.
-
"Liverpool had the likes of Jovanovic, Kochensky and Poulson on big wages for very little return. They didn't use being stung on those deals as a reason not to compete anymore."
No they go bought by new owners who then spent even more money.
who also proved that they didn't need to be oil rich Arabs to be able to compete.
-
True.
But those players were still on the books.
The wage bill- including also the likes of Joe Cole who barely turned up last year must have been in a right state. And no CL football to offset it either. Their income would still be higher, granted. But the conditions were there -if the new owners were so inclined- to say players out before players in.
If RL no longer has the funds required to compete at the top end that's one thing. I can't really slate a man who has put in a large chunk of his families inheritance over that initial four year period. And maybe some organic approach -with the emphasis of getting good young players on the up and either moving them on for bigger fees or hoping it all clicks in one magical season before the sharks start circulating, is as much as we can realistically hope for under the circumstances.
But If the money is available and we are really just waiting for the likes of Heskey and Beye to move on before we think about competing again, that's a mistake in my book. All the sides who were above us 18 months ago have pushed on that bit more and others have closed the gap. Effectively we'd be purposely sabotaging any advantage we had built up between 2006-10.
-
"Liverpool had the likes of Jovanovic, Kochensky and Poulson on big wages for very little return. They didn't use being stung on those deals as a reason not to compete anymore."
No they go bought by new owners who then spent even more money.
who also proved that they didn't need to be oil rich Arabs to be able to compete.
To me they're just doing what Randy did when he took over, especially when you factor in the incoming fees for players like Torres and Morales. Time will tell what their longterm capabilities are.
-
A warning about oil-rich billionaires and their business dealings. My Dad was at the Dubai airshow last week, and the immensely rich owner of Qatar Airways turned round and said he was cancelling his order for 44 Airbus aircraft because they are "rubbish" and changed his order to Boeing 777s. By the end of the day he told Boeing to stuff it and chose the "rubbish" Airbus again. My Dad has worked with the lot - Qatar, Emirates etc. and they really are so rich they are a law unto themselves. They would have no problem dumping Man City, for example, on a whim. I suppose when you are so rich nothing matters at all.
-
I agree with John M that what the Fenway group are doing at Liverpool is similar to what Randy did in his first couple of seasons, which is to spend big money in an attempt to get into the CL. Randy has had to reign it in now so it will be interesting to see what the liverpool board do if they haven't got CL football in a couple of years.
But anyway, we are nowhere near Liverpool in terms of global or domestic following and therefore potential revenue and turnover so comparing the two clubs abilities to absorb the cost of transfer flops is pretty pointless.
-
Don't think for a second that John Henry isn't going to want to see the same return Randy had hoped for based on his investment. The enormous amounts of money spent on mainly British players is very MONesque even if you argue the quality of the acquistions if at least on paper look better quality. The Fenway Group aren't going to keep ploughing cash into the club without seeing them meet their CL goals. Randy did it for the best part of 3 years to achieve that goal albeit from a less advantageous position, and then realised it had to be managed better because it was spiralling out of control. Liverpool won't be able to to keep spending at this rate and either Dalglish will get the boot, or they'll simply tell him to make use with what he has. Whether that prompts Dalglish to do a MON remains to be seen. It's not like he doesn't have an MO for walking out on clubs.
-
I dont know if their UK acquisitions do look better on paper. take their top three buys Henderson Carroll Adam. And for us Young Milner Downing.
-
I dont know if their UK acquisitions do look better on paper. take their top three buys Henderson Carroll Adam. And for us Young Milner Downing.
Wouldn't one of their top acquisitions also be downing but just at a mind boggling 20m?
I have no problem with Villa selling players in that fashion I just wish the profits would be reinvested.
-
And Suarez.