Randy Lerner "State of Aston Villa" Statement

[hawkeye]

why would any one want to buy us?

[brian green]

Everton continue to stand that theory on its head.   They are potless and the club has been for sale for ever.   The difference with them and us is that their lack of money has forged an indomitable spirit in the squad.   You will not see Jagielka or Cahill or Baines posing in a nightclub with the players of a club tapping him up and then claiming it was a fake photo.   If Everton can do it.   We can do it.  Randy Lerner cannot possibly be as skint as Bill Kenwright (allegedly).

[Villa'Zawg]

He could find someone to fund additional wages based on current revenue?

There's an awful lot of nonsense talked about our wage bill. The gap between revenue and wages in Doug's final year was £10.7m. How big does that gap need to be now?

I'm no expert but surely the size of "the gap" is where we generate funds for growth, in Doug's day it went in dividends. I've seen the Dragon's Den and a pitch that offers 88% of turnover in wages and no plan for increasing revenue beyond what they ask for on the day has little chance of attracting investment.

I'm not advocating ongoing wages of 88% but if you could do all the other things you needed to do in that 12% gap or you could envisage increased revenue at a better margin, that that could be perfectly acceptable from a business perspective..

If we're to have a discussion on an acceptable revenue/wages ratio then it's worth considering what gross margin is needed. I think it is an important question.

A discussion that consists solely of "wages are too high", is of no use to anyone. Particularly when you consider that our wage levels are in no way excessive for the upper reaches of the PL.

[Dave Cooper please]

why would any one want to buy us?

A good club in the most watched league in the world with a great stadium and a good fanbase?
Who indeed?

I'm not saying they would be queueing up but it's not inconceivable that we could be pretty much ideal for the next billionaire who fancies a pop at real-life Football Manager is it?

[Whiney MacWhineface]

I'm not advocating ongoing wages of 88% but if you could do all the other things you needed to do in that 12% gap or you could envisage increased revenue at a better margin, that that could be perfectly acceptable from a business perspective..

Hmmm. We lost about £30m on turnover of £90m 2009/10, if I remember correctly. To break even we need to hack a hell of a lot more out of the wage bill than Heskey and Beye (or even 12%), or sell more shirts/seats, or sell more players. Or Randy has to fund the shortfall.

All but the last option seen either unlikely or extremely unpalatable/disastrous. So the question would seem to lurch round to how much is Randy prepared to pony up each year just to be average let alone competitive?

[Risso]

It was Randy who sanctioned the spending of high wages for crap players.  I honestly believe that he's blown his wad so to speak.

[Chris Smith]

Then we're stuck with a crap owner unfortunately.

You appear to see everything in black and white terms, Risso.

I think much of what Lerner has done has been very good. I think his mistake was that he expected to increase revenue more quickly than he did. It's an error that we all made, we assumed that Doug was holding us back and that as soon as he left in would be wine and roses all the way. Who knows, if it hadn't been for the global recession and Man City distorting the market it might have worked.

So, now we are we are. To me, whoever is in charge the plan that they've set out seems to me to be the most viable; increase revenue, invest wisely in players, develop our own talent and seek to grow at a sustainable level. That doesn't seem "crap" to me.

[Risso]

Then we're stuck with a crap owner unfortunately.

You appear to see everything in black and white terms, Risso.

I think much of what Lerner has done has been very good. I think his mistake was that he expected to increase revenue more quickly than he did. It's an error that we all made, we assumed that Doug was holding us back and that as soon as he left in would be wine and roses all the way. Who knows, if it hadn't been for the global recession and Man City distorting the market it might have worked.

So, now we are we are. To me, whoever is in charge the plan that they've set out seems to me to be the most viable; increase revenue, invest wisely in players, develop our own talent and seek to grow at a sustainable level. That doesn't seem "crap" to me.

You keep talking as if it's a deliberate strategy Chris.  It isn't, it's simple retrenchment because Randy doesn't have the cash or the business nous to compete now that his first five years have amounted to nothing.

[Greg N'Ash]

I am scared to death by the extent to which we have slammed on the brakes  - our Osbournesque economies will end in tears - but I really can't take anyone seriously if they think 88 percent of turnover going on wages is sensible or sustainable.

Disagreeing with the way we're going about tackling the problem is one thing, pretending it isn't a problem is another one entirely.

Villadawg - honest question (and it's one I wouldn't really know how to answer myself, to be honest), but what if Randy simply hasn't got the money to fund things in a more extravagant way?

Not "should he spend more" or "are we spending a lot", but "the money isn't there"?

Randy should sell to a better business man.  His one strategy - letting O'Neill run around like a kid in a sweet shop - hasn't worked, and now he's bereft of funds and ideas.   

Probably my view too. Sorry but a big premiership club is not for someone on his uppers as we saw with Ellis

But what if nobody else wants to buy it.

What then?

clubs are still being bought with QPR likely to be the next one. The big obstacle last time was Ellis not wanting to sell because he liked the prestige and publiclty too much. He'd still be here now if finances hadn't changed with Sky making it impossible to continue without dipping his hand into his own money- a big no-no for him. Football clubs, especially at our size are a rich man's business and if its true Lerner's financial shares have dropped like a stone, then i'm guessing he'd consider selling to prop up his other interests

[TheSandman]

For every Abu Dhabi Investment group there are two Carson Yeungs.

[Greg N'Ash]

Everton continue to stand that theory on its head.   They are potless and the club has been for sale for ever.   The difference with them and us is that their lack of money has forged an indomitable spirit in the squad.   You will not see Jagielka or Cahill or Baines posing in a nightclub with the players of a club tapping him up and then claiming it was a fake photo.   If Everton can do it.   We can do it.  Randy Lerner cannot possibly be as skint as Bill Kenwright (allegedly).

yep Everton do work on a tight budget but they usually re-invest a signifcant part of the money they make on selling players. I have no problem with us cutting the wages back or selling to buy BUT we're not doing that. We're selling and pocketing the majority of the transfers fee for god knows what- I suspect we'll see another of these Lerner "Management fee's" popping up in the next accounts

[robbyfvillain]

I am scared to death by the extent to which we have slammed on the brakes  - our Osbournesque economies will end in tears - but I really can't take anyone seriously if they think 88 percent of turnover going on wages is sensible or sustainable.

Disagreeing with the way we're going about tackling the problem is one thing, pretending it isn't a problem is another one entirely.

Villadawg - honest question (and it's one I wouldn't really know how to answer myself, to be honest), but what if Randy simply hasn't got the money to fund things in a more extravagant way?

Not "should he spend more" or "are we spending a lot", but "the money isn't there"?

Randy should sell to a better business man.  His one strategy - letting O'Neill run around like a kid in a sweet shop - hasn't worked, and now he's bereft of funds and ideas.   

Probably my view too. Sorry but a big premiership club is not for someone on his uppers as we saw with Ellis

But what if nobody else wants to buy it.

What then?

clubs are still being bought with QPR likely to be the next one. The big obstacle last time was Ellis not wanting to sell because he liked the prestige and publiclty too much. He'd still be here now if finances hadn't changed with Sky making it impossible to continue without dipping his hand into his own money- a big no-no for him. Football clubs, especially at our size are a rich man's business and if its true Lerner's financial shares have dropped like a stone, then i'm guessing he'd consider selling to prop up his other interests

If we say $3bn is the minimum then there are about 380 possible purchasers according to Forbes.
http://www.forbes.com/wealth/billionaires#p_38_s_arank_-1__-1

[Greg N'Ash]

Not sure 3 billion is the minimum. I just think Lerner no longer has 1billion or anything like that in real money.

[Chris Smith]

Not sure 3 billion is the minimum. I just think Lerner no longer has 1billion or anything like that in real money.

So your plan is still "Randy should spend more". I'll ask again, how can you feel comfortable asking him to put in more of his money when you won't spend a penny of your own?

It's ironic that we send so much of our time whinging about how money is ruining football yet when our own club talk about a sustainable operating model we cry foul and call for more spending regardless.

[brian green]

Everton may have reinvested money from the sale of players Greg but they have not invested it in new or better players.   Didn't somebody post that it is two years since they bought a player?