0% Villa: Benitez sacked (Confirmed p.6)

[pestria]

Villa are a financially sound club, with new owners who want to compete at the highest level that the club is capable of competing at. They will not (and why should they) throw endless money at the objective. They will oversee a gradual improvement, year on year and this with the inevitable financial melt down of the over spenders MAY result in Villa reaching the top.
This is not guaranteed though. The only guarantee is that Villa will remain a football club in the English league.

I've heard that before. In fact, we used to hear it from Mark Ansell at every AGM.

Agreed Dave.

There'll never be a meltdown.  There's always someone willing to 'invest'.  So you have to spend to compete I'm afraid.

What was SGT's quote about Ellis spending enough to make a good team and not a great one?

Plus ca change ....

[Greg N'Ash]

Still think we've swapped a millionaire who can't compete for a billionaire who can't compete. the money could have been spent better though and we were possibly one january signing away from top4 2 seasons ago.

[hilts_coolerking]

Those that still think ... the likes of Mourinio (spelling) Torres and Fabergas will be only to pleased to sign up, if only we took the trouble to ask them.

I don't think there's anyone who thinks that.

[dave.woodhall]

Villa are a financially sound club, with new owners who want to compete at the highest level that the club is capable of competing at. They will not (and why should they) throw endless money at the objective. They will oversee a gradual improvement, year on year and this with the inevitable financial melt down of the over spenders MAY result in Villa reaching the top.
This is not guaranteed though. The only guarantee is that Villa will remain a football club in the English league.

I've heard that before. In fact, we used to hear it from Mark Ansell at every AGM.

Agreed Dave.

There'll never be a meltdown.  There's always someone willing to 'invest'.  So you have to spend to compete I'm afraid.

What was SGT's quote about Ellis spending enough to make a good team and not a great one?

Plus ca change ....

I don't blame Randy now, and with hindsight we shouldn't have blamed Doug so much then. You can't spend what you haven't got.

[pestria]

Villa are a financially sound club, with new owners who want to compete at the highest level that the club is capable of competing at. They will not (and why should they) throw endless money at the objective. They will oversee a gradual improvement, year on year and this with the inevitable financial melt down of the over spenders MAY result in Villa reaching the top.
This is not guaranteed though. The only guarantee is that Villa will remain a football club in the English league.

I've heard that before. In fact, we used to hear it from Mark Ansell at every AGM.

Agreed Dave.

There'll never be a meltdown.  There's always someone willing to 'invest'.  So you have to spend to compete I'm afraid.

What was SGT's quote about Ellis spending enough to make a good team and not a great one?

Plus ca change ....

I don't blame Randy now, and with hindsight we shouldn't have blamed Doug so much then. You can't spend what you haven't got.

Me neither ... and I accept they can't openly admit to it, although has come close in recent times.

[dave.woodhall]

I don't blame Randy now, and with hindsight we shouldn't have blamed Doug so much then. You can't spend what you haven't got.

Me neither ... and I accept they can't openly admit to it, although has come close in recent times.

I also think the difference is that in those days clubs (or rathr, their owners) spent £20 million thinking they'd eventually get £30 million back, whereas now they'll spend £200 million knowing they'll never get it back but they can afford to spend it.

[KevinGage]

Villa are a financially sound club, with new owners who want to compete at the highest level that the club is capable of competing at. They will not (and why should they) throw endless money at the objective. They will oversee a gradual improvement, year on year and this with the inevitable financial melt down of the over spenders MAY result in Villa reaching the top.
This is not guaranteed though. The only guarantee is that Villa will remain a football club in the English league.

I've heard that before. In fact, we used to hear it from Mark Ansell at every AGM.

Agreed Dave.

There'll never be a meltdown.  There's always someone willing to 'invest'.  So you have to spend to compete I'm afraid.

What was SGT's quote about Ellis spending enough to make a good team and not a great one?

Plus ca change ....

I don't blame Randy now, and with hindsight we shouldn't have blamed Doug so much then. You can't spend what you haven't got.

The gulf in finances wasn't what it is now, in fairness.
It's also difficult to compare a man who spent just over £100k of his own money in 30+ years (and that was to get a controlling stake)  with a guy who has already invested £180 million and rising in just under four.

Never had a problem with Herbert not spending what he didn't have. You couldn't dislike someone for not being a billlionaire. Did have a problem with him making out that every transfer, every penny spent was his money though. The self-styled 'Mr Aston Villa' and all the rest of it.

[barrysleftfoot]

Not quite sure thats right dave........most clubs values have gone up significantly in the last few years.How much would we be worth now....£150m?

  Ure.......not for sale at £1.5billion, Lplop....£600m?

  The reason clubs are taken over, partic clubs like Villa, Everton, Citeeeeh etc, are so attractive is because you are getting a potentially big club without paying top dollar, thats why some investors are quite willing to throw short term money at clubs, in the hope at rich returns.......not that i think that is why Randy is in charge.

[Concrete John]

I don't blame Randy now, and with hindsight we shouldn't have blamed Doug so much then. You can't spend what you haven't got.

I think the thing with Doug was that the spending he funded was fairly static at a time when the general finances of football were on an upward spiral, which is why we were finding ourselves left behind.  As a club we were not moving with the times.  We are now thanks to Randy putting the money in, but in many respects still playing catch up.

[dave.woodhall]

I don't blame Randy now, and with hindsight we shouldn't have blamed Doug so much then. You can't spend what you haven't got.

I think the thing with Doug was that the spending he funded was fairly static at a time when the general finances of football were on an upward spiral, which is why we were finding ourselves left behind.  As a club we were not moving with the times.  We are now thanks to Randy putting the money in, but in many respects still playing catch up.

The trouble was that first we weren't going to spend big, then when we chaged our minds it was when the market was at its height and we ended up paying top dollar & then some for very ordinary players.

[peter w]

Optimism is still a bij (my 'the letter between f and h' is broken thanks to the little man) pointer here thoujh. We still think Randy will spend somethink and we've never had a sustained amount of summer spendin as we have seen over the last 3-4 seasons. as much as we will cut back this summer you still, or I do, expect us to compete with those around us in terms of outlay - the usual suspects excepted.

[NorthYvillan]

Still think we've swapped a millionaire who can't compete for a billionaire who can't compete.......

Hating to ruin some people's misconceptions - not just the one quoted here - but Randy is not a billionaire. His personal wealth is estimated at £800 million - £200 million short of this qualification.

[Dave Cooper please]

Still think we've swapped a millionaire who can't compete for a billionaire who can't compete.......

Hating to ruin some people's misconceptions - not just the one quoted here - but Randy is not a billionaire. His personal wealth is estimated at £800 million - £200 million short of this qualification.

That would make him a dollar billionaire though would it not?

[Concrete John]

I don't blame Randy now, and with hindsight we shouldn't have blamed Doug so much then. You can't spend what you haven't got.

I think the thing with Doug was that the spending he funded was fairly static at a time when the general finances of football were on an upward spiral, which is why we were finding ourselves left behind.  As a club we were not moving with the times.  We are now thanks to Randy putting the money in, but in many respects still playing catch up.

The trouble was that first we weren't going to spend big, then when we chaged our minds it was when the market was at its height and we ended up paying top dollar & then some for very ordinary players.

If you mean Gregory era, then I agree.  Without doing some maths I can't be arsed with at this time of night, I always felt that we were spending the floatation money rather than Doug's, but in fairness it did amount to the same thing.  However, one spending spree is relatively meaningless without it being part of an established building programme, which it was not.

The difference now is that I feel a knock back of whatever kind will not deter the board from their goals.  Only now do I feel that this is being done WITH the supporters and not inspite of them.  We can argue about the manager until we bore each other to tears, but I wouldn't swap our owner for the next idiot to come along with a billion in oil money and a passing interest in the newest plaything.

[NorthYvillan]

Still think we've swapped a millionaire who can't compete for a billionaire who can't compete.......

Hating to ruin some people's misconceptions - not just the one quoted here - but Randy is not a billionaire. His personal wealth is estimated at £800 million - £200 million short of this qualification.

That would make him a dollar billionaire though would it not?

Yes it would.

However - talking £ sterling, from what I read on football's rich list, it is still well short of: Man City's owners - £20+ billion; Abramovic - £17 billion; the Glazers; the combined wealth of the Arsenal Directors; the combined wealth of the Tottenham board (one member of which has a personal  wealth of approx £1.5 billion); An Everton director has  a personal wealth of over £1 billion.

It is about the same amount as the combined personal wealth of Gillete and Hicks at Liverpool.

Perhaps we are not as high up in the "wealthy club league" as some supporters think?