Randy Lerner "State of Aston Villa" Statement

[Risso]

I think Randy has been brilliant, but has had a difficult 12 months. I hope he pulls through and is proved right on the current strategy, as it could backfire. We are ok 11 wise, but 2-3 injuries and we are even more threadbare than we were last season. We had a small squad 2 years ago. The balance is out, and I hope they know what they are doing. I admire them for sticking to their guns on their choice of manager etc, but the current policy will see us lose Bent and if he plays well NZogbia, then whichever of the kids are successful before long.

Brilliant?  You're joking aren't you, the man is a crap businessman, and an even worse football team owner.  He hasn't got the first clue.  He inherited a fortune and is doing his best to piss most of it up the wall.

[bertlambshank]

Why am I being quoted for something I haven't said.
That is very strange.

[dave.woodhall]

But that is exactly the point is it his money or the club's future revenues. Only time will tell.

Of course it's his money. He lent it to the club. Do you think he should never get it back?

When he has mismanaged it to the extent that he has, then NO I don't think he should get all of it back because if he does then the club will have carried the burden of his financial incompetence.

I don't remember it being called incompetence when we were paying top money for players.

Presumably your rule should apply to any other potential owner that might be out there - come in, spend a fortune, then fuck off when you can't spend any more.

As financial statements aren't released for the best part of 6 months later than the period to which they relate then you would have to be mystic meg to know how well the commercial and marketing side were doing.

As for any new owners, on a personal level I absolutely would not want them to spend a fortune. I would prefer them to grow the business as per the current regime intend to but with 2 exceptions.

1) They need to start from a sensible wage structure. Cutting back the way Randy is doing at the moment could well result in the unthinkable happening if we hit a run of injuries.

2) They need to get football knowledge on the board.

I have to say I have no faith in any part of their management skills and feel if past performance is anything to go by then the future is looking anything but bright.

I agree with the numbered points, but please tell me what they've done that is so bad beyond giving the manager too much money to spend, and why no-one criticised them for it when the team was doing well.

[bertlambshank]

Somebody is using my username.
They might talk more sense than me.

[Shrek]

The wage is still high, remember nearly every single player is on to much, I think it will take a few year to basically turn the squad around and get all the high earners out. Next year Beye, Heskey, Young, Cuellar will leave (I think).

We need to start from a solid base which will take time to achieve.

[Villa'Zawg]

The assertion that Randy Lerner's investment in the team has been in any way excessive or extravagant is complete and utter bollocks.

He invested an average of £20m a season for four seasons. He then stopped investing and has now reversed. To put that in perspective, £20m net spend is the same amount of money that McLeish spent at Blues during his final two seasons.

[Mellin]

Try comparing that net spend with all the other clubs in the league over the last four years. Man City aside, we will be right up there...very possibly top.

[pauliewalnuts]

Try comparing that net spend with all the other clubs in the league over the last four years. Man City aside, we will be right up there...very possibly top.

Not when you subtract the claw back this summer.

[robbyfvillain]

I agree with the numbered points, but please tell me what they've done that is so bad beyond giving the manager too much money to spend, and why no-one criticised them for it when the team was doing well.

1) Inability to grow the commercial revenue
2) Allowing the wages to grow to (difficult to be sure of the % as the latest accounts are not yet available) say 85% of turnover.
3) The lack of information flowing out of the club. We are not a bank which treats its customers like something on the bottom of its shoe. We need to be wooed, they need to develop better relations with the press.
4) The strategy - they didn't have one except to finish in the champions league places. In this letter to ST's it states their ambitions have not altered which is to 'manage the club for growth'. Well that's the first time I have heard that statement so it appears to me they have either changed their strategy (no problem with that but at least be honest) or they think they can pull the wool over our eyes.
5) The lack of specific business acumen, particularly with football knowledge but also with the marketing of the club. We have been unable to keep a number of board members over any period of time. This is a pointer that all is not well in the big house.

Oh yeah and the bastards took my seat off me (Trinity 400). In fact I could see the commercial sense of that and agreed with it although their handling of the move was poor.

My criticism is less about the team although the last year of MON did cure my insomnia.

When looking at the management of any business it is only after the fact that a true picture emerges. Finance and filing of accounts  only tell you what has happened from 18 months or more earlier which is why it is only in the last year that all of this is coming to light.

The effects of the spending slurge and wage expansion will be with us for years to come. The wages will reduce next year with Heskey and Beye coming off the bill, but if Randy charges interest on his loans and his management charges then we are going to struggle for a long time to come.

[Villa'Zawg]

Try comparing that net spend with all the other clubs in the league over the last four years. Man City aside, we will be right up there...very possibly top.

Not when you subtract the claw back this summer.

Regardless of this summer Some other club's transfer balance sheet - Clicky

[pauliewalnuts]

What was the 12m management charge for?

[dave.woodhall]

I agree with the numbered points, but please tell me what they've done that is so bad beyond giving the manager too much money to spend, and why no-one criticised them for it when the team was doing well.

1) Inability to grow the commercial revenue
2) Allowing the wages to grow to (difficult to be sure of the % as the latest accounts are not yet available) say 85% of turnover.
3) The lack of information flowing out of the club. We are not a bank which treats its customers like something on the bottom of its shoe. We need to be wooed, they need to develop better relations with the press.
4) The strategy - they didn't have one except to finish in the champions league places. In this letter to ST's it states their ambitions have not altered which is to 'manage the club for growth'. Well that's the first time I have heard that statement so it appears to me they have either changed their strategy (no problem with that but at least be honest) or they think they can pull the wool over our eyes.
5) The lack of specific business acumen, particularly with football knowledge but also with the marketing of the club. We have been unable to keep a number of board members over any period of time. This is a pointer that all is not well in the big house.

Oh yeah and the bastards took my seat off me (Trinity 400). In fact I could see the commercial sense of that and agreed with it although their handling of the move was poor.

My criticism is less about the team although the last year of MON did cure my insomnia.

When looking at the management of any business it is only after the fact that a true picture emerges. Finance and filing of accounts  only tell you what has happened from 18 months or more earlier which is why it is only in the last year that all of this is coming to light.

The effects of the spending slurge and wage expansion will be with us for years to come. The wages will reduce next year with Heskey and Beye coming off the bill, but if Randy charges interest on his loans and his management charges then we are going to struggle for a long time to come.

1) They tried. Some of their marketing strategies have been innovative but it's not their fault they couldn't bring in massive amounts of commercial revenue nor improve the gates higher than the levels of a couple of seasons ago, which were on a par with our best ever. It's this which shows Villa aren't as big as we like to think they are.

2) The "spending too much of his own money" argument again.

3) I can remember when it was a great thing that Randy didn't talk to the media - it made a change from Doug. I also don't know of many clubs who tell their supporters more than we do.

4) I also don't know of any other club with a defined strategy, nor how one could be implemented.

5) We all know why the CEOs left. Apart from that there was Steve Stride (retired) and two Americans who we never heard from and who never seemed to do much,. 

[ozzjim]

I think Randy has been brilliant, but has had a difficult 12 months. I hope he pulls through and is proved right on the current strategy, as it could backfire. We are ok 11 wise, but 2-3 injuries and we are even more threadbare than we were last season. We had a small squad 2 years ago. The balance is out, and I hope they know what they are doing. I admire them for sticking to their guns on their choice of manager etc, but the current policy will see us lose Bent and if he plays well NZogbia, then whichever of the kids are successful before long.

Brilliant?  You're joking aren't you, the man is a crap businessman, and an even worse football team owner.  He hasn't got the first clue.  He inherited a fortune and is doing his best to piss most of it up the wall.

His overall life maybe, but he came in and did just what as fans you would want, and yes, he was brilliant. Unfortunately he made massive mistakes, not having football men around him in positions that could question O'Neill being one, but the training ground, the pub, the general feel good factor was brilliant. The problem is he has got burnt, but rather than scale back gradually and changing policy so high wage players are replaced with young ones that will have sell on potential etc, he has gone into recession mode, and I feel has left his new manager high and dry at the moment. Questions need to be asked of him, as they should of anyone at the top of the tree if things start to go awry, but to suggest he should go is wrong.

[Mellin]

The assertion that Randy Lerner's investment in the team has been in any way excessive or extravagant is complete and utter bollocks.

He invested an average of £20m a season for four seasons. He then stopped investing and has now reversed. To put that in perspective, £20m net spend is the same amount of money that McLeish spent at Blues during his final two seasons.

Net spend for the last five years:

# 2006 - 2011 Purchased Gross --- Sold --- Nett --- Per Season

1 Manchester City --- £455,670,000 --- £75,550,000 --- £380,120,000 --- £76,024,000
2 Chelsea --- £199,500,000 --- £101,800,000 --- £97,700,000 --- £19,540,000
3 Tottenham --- £230,300,000 --- £135,100,000 --- £95,200,000 --- £19,040,000
4 Aston Villa --- £145,350,000 --- £67,650,000 --- £77,700,000 --- £15,540,000
5 Sunderland --- £122,850,000 --- £65,725,000 --- £57,125,000 --- £11,425,000
6 Liverpool --- £253,240,000 --- £205,280,000 --- £47,960,000 --- £9,592,000
7 Stoke City --- £54,725,000 --- £10,920,000 --- £43,805,000 --- £8,761,000
8 West Ham --- £105,070,000 --- £68,225,000 --- £36,845,000 --- £7,369,000
9 Fulham --- £63,675,000 --- £28,875,000 --- £34,800,000 --- £6,960,000
10 Bolton --- £52,150,000 --- £26,750,000 --- £25,400,000 --- £5,080,000
11 Wolves --- £33,525,000 --- £8,225,000 --- £25,300,000 --- £5,060,000
12 West Bromwich Albion --- £46,585,000 --- £27,560,000 --- £19,025,000 --- £3,805,000
15 Everton --- £64,750,500 --- £48,250,000 --- £16,500,500 --- £3,300,100
14 Manchester United --- £164,300,000 --- £150,850,000 --- £13,450,000 --- £2,690,000
15 Birmingham City --- £64,875,000 --- £53,850,000 --- £11,025,000 --- £2,205,000
16 Blackpool --- £4,700,000 --- £250,000 --- £4,450,000 --- £890,000
17 Wigan --- £58,500,000 --- £60,200,000 --- -£1,700,000 --- -£340,000
18 Blackburn Rovers --- £41,752,000 --- £47,290,000 --- -£5,538,000 --- -£1,107,600
19 Arsenal --- £85,150,000 --- £113,000,000 --- -£27,850,000 --- -£5,570,000
20 Newcastle --- £63,100,000 --- £112,650,000 --- -£49,550,000 --- -£9,910,000

We went for broke and the chance has gone. Time to reign it in.

[robbyfvillain]

I agree with the numbered points, but please tell me what they've done that is so bad beyond giving the manager too much money to spend, and why no-one criticised them for it when the team was doing well.

1) Inability to grow the commercial revenue
2) Allowing the wages to grow to (difficult to be sure of the % as the latest accounts are not yet available) say 85% of turnover.
3) The lack of information flowing out of the club. We are not a bank which treats its customers like something on the bottom of its shoe. We need to be wooed, they need to develop better relations with the press.
4) The strategy - they didn't have one except to finish in the champions league places. In this letter to ST's it states their ambitions have not altered which is to 'manage the club for growth'. Well that's the first time I have heard that statement so it appears to me they have either changed their strategy (no problem with that but at least be honest) or they think they can pull the wool over our eyes.
5) The lack of specific business acumen, particularly with football knowledge but also with the marketing of the club. We have been unable to keep a number of board members over any period of time. This is a pointer that all is not well in the big house.

Oh yeah and the bastards took my seat off me (Trinity 400). In fact I could see the commercial sense of that and agreed with it although their handling of the move was poor.

My criticism is less about the team although the last year of MON did cure my insomnia.

When looking at the management of any business it is only after the fact that a true picture emerges. Finance and filing of accounts  only tell you what has happened from 18 months or more earlier which is why it is only in the last year that all of this is coming to light.

The effects of the spending slurge and wage expansion will be with us for years to come. The wages will reduce next year with Heskey and Beye coming off the bill, but if Randy charges interest on his loans and his management charges then we are going to struggle for a long time to come.

1) They tried. Some of their marketing strategies have been innovative but it's not their fault they couldn't bring in massive amounts of commercial revenue nor improve the gates higher than the levels of a couple of seasons ago, which were on a par with our best ever. It's this which shows Villa aren't as big as we like to think they are.

2) The "spending too much of his own money" argument again.

3) I can remember when it was a great thing that Randy didn't talk to the media - it made a change from Doug. I also don't know of many clubs who tell their supporters more than we do.

4) I also don't know of any other club with a defined strategy, nor how one could be implemented.

5) We all know why the CEOs left. Apart from that there was Steve Stride (retired) and two Americans who we never heard from and who never seemed to do much,.

1) Yes they tried but equally they failed.

2) When he writes off the loans then fair play to the guy it will have been his own money. While he charges the club interest then he is, on behalf of the club borrowing the money and spending (wasting) it. Not my idea of good management.

3) Don't care whether Randy says anything or not but the silence at critical times over the last few years is deafening. Look at the way we handled the appointment of both Houllier, who was announced but couldn't start till (well nobody knew at the time) , and McLeish, well the less said about that the better. 

4) I have never heard of any business above one or two man bands which doesn't have a strategy. What the hell is any board there for if not to define and constantly evaluate the strategy. Strategies change - there is nothing wrong with that and ours has clearly changed. Yet we get a letter which states their ambitions have not changed. The General has constantly stated exactly the same. Who believes them?

5) We may well know why the CEO's left but if the board is so weak as to not stand up to the manager then I would certainly class that as poor management.