New Swiss ramble...an excellent insight into the current situation...

[ktvillan]

Newcastle released their figures today:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/mar/08/newcastle-united-losses-fall

Sadly that suggests Newcastle are another team we wont be able to compete with for the next few years.

I don't get it though - it seems that us sending them down the other year and expecting them to impload because of all the silly contracts they couldn't get out of actually had the opposite effect and has done them the world of good.

I wish I knew how they did it.

Not just that, two years ago Ashley looked like the biggest joke of an owner a club could have, even taking into account the porno 3 and the Venkeys.  And Randy looked like one of the best.    Amazing how quickly things can change.

[ktvillan]

This is just the type of thing that has made me lose my interest in the game. Football, and Villa, is not a spread sheet of figures.

Or maybe it is!

I've just read a comment saying Randy should "finally put his hand in his pocket" and calling for more investment because "We can't go on like this." Somewhere along the line a belief has developed which in its most simplistic form holds that we should always be at the top of the league and as soon as we aren't the owner, whoever he might be, should give the club away to someone who will again spend enough to make sure we return the  re.

I wouldn't say many fans believe that Dave.  I reckon most would recognise that Randy has pumped more than enough money in, but that he's badly mismanaged the way it's been spent.  And now we're all having to pay the price for that mismanagement.  I reckon a more widely held view, supported by comments here, is irritation and frustration that there is little sign of him bringing in people with football knowledge and connections that most would accept the club desperately needs.  And meanwhile we're having to endure McLeish's nightmare vision of what football should be about, and there's no indication of whether the spending shackles will ever be lifted or if mediocrity is to be the limit of our ambition.  Surrounding yourself with your bestest mates regardless of their ability (or lack thereof) doesn't sound like the best of business models to many observers.   

[Dave Javu]

Newcastle released their figures today:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/mar/08/newcastle-united-losses-fall

Sadly that suggests Newcastle are another team we wont be able to compete with for the next few years.

I don't get it though - it seems that us sending them down the other year and expecting them to impload because of all the silly contracts they couldn't get out of actually had the opposite effect and has done them the world of good.

I wish I knew how they did it.

From that article:

"Mike Ashley continues to provide loans totalling £140m interest-free, for which we are extraordinarily fortunate."

[dave.woodhall]

This is just the type of thing that has made me lose my interest in the game. Football, and Villa, is not a spread sheet of figures.

Or maybe it is!

I've just read a comment saying Randy should "finally put his hand in his pocket" and calling for more investment because "We can't go on like this." Somewhere along the line a belief has developed which in its most simplistic form holds that we should always be at the top of the league and as soon as we aren't the owner, whoever he might be, should give the club away to someone who will again spend enough to make sure we return the  re.

I wouldn't say many fans believe that Dave.  I reckon most would recognise that Randy has pumped more than enough money in, but that he's badly mismanaged the way it's been spent.  And now we're all having to pay the price for that mismanagement.  I reckon a more widely held view, supported by comments here, is irritation and frustration that there is little sign of him bringing in people with football knowledge and connections that most would accept the club desperately needs.  And meanwhile we're having to endure McLeish's nightmare vision of what football should be about, and there's no indication of whether the spending shackles will ever be lifted or if mediocrity is to be the limit of our ambition.  Surrounding yourself with your bestest mates regardless of their ability (or lack thereof) doesn't sound like the best of business models to many observers.   

Anyone with any sense would say that, but the internet isn't exactly the best place to find sense.

[pauliewalnuts]

Newcastle released their figures today:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/mar/08/newcastle-united-losses-fall

Sadly that suggests Newcastle are another team we wont be able to compete with for the next few years.

I don't get it though - it seems that us sending them down the other year and expecting them to impload because of all the silly contracts they couldn't get out of actually had the opposite effect and has done them the world of good.

I wish I knew how they did it.

Not just that, two years ago Ashley looked like the biggest joke of an owner a club could have, even taking into account the porno 3 and the Venkeys.  And Randy looked like one of the best.    Amazing how quickly things can change.

I bet they didn't think much of Mike Ashley when they got relegated recently, though. Or when they sold Caroll, either.

[Vanilla]

This is just the type of thing that has made me lose my interest in the game. Football, and Villa, is not a spread sheet of figures.

Or maybe it is!

I've just read a comment saying Randy should "finally put his hand in his pocket" and calling for more investment because "We can't go on like this." Somewhere along the line a belief has developed which in its most simplistic form holds that we should always be at the top of the league and as soon as we aren't the owner, whoever he might be, should give the club away to someone who will again spend enough to make sure we return the  re.

I wouldn't say many fans believe that Dave.  I reckon most would recognise that Randy has pumped more than enough money in, but that he's badly mismanaged the way it's been spent.  And now we're all having to pay the price for that mismanagement.  I reckon a more widely held view, supported by comments here, is irritation and frustration that there is little sign of him bringing in people with football knowledge and connections that most would accept the club desperately needs.  And meanwhile we're having to endure McLeish's nightmare vision of what football should be about, and there's no indication of whether the spending shackles will ever be lifted or if mediocrity is to be the limit of our ambition.  Surrounding yourself with your bestest mates regardless of their ability (or lack thereof) doesn't sound like the best of business models to many observers.   

Anyone with any sense would say that, but the internet isn't exactly the best place to find sense.

I think most sensible fans respect the amount of money RL has put into the club. However, if he had had a greater grasp of the EPL with a more hands on role in the day-to-day running of the club, this could have led to the transfer funds being spread out over a few more seasons rather than all under MONs tenure, or at least queries being made about some of the transfer targets and salaries paid. 

That said, we fans weren't complaining that much at the time I suppose.

[N'ZMAV]

Bloody hell, that took a while to digest, good article though. Must have taken him days to do that...

[pauliewalnuts]

The problem isn't the money he has or has not thrown at the club, it is the fact that he's run the club so badly, that a great deal of it was allowed to go to waste.

It looks like he trusted MON far too much, which has resulted in the big money paid for, and big contracts handed to, what were largely (not entirely, largely) mediocre players.

It was nice when we were spending big money, but had we known it was truly "shit or bust" as it turns out, I suspect most of us would have been a bit more circumspect about it.

[dave.woodhall]

I think most sensible fans respect the amount of money RL has put into the club. However, if he had had a greater grasp of the EPL with a more hands on role in the day-to-day running of the club, this could have led to the transfer funds being spread out over a few more seasons rather than all under MONs tenure, or at least queries being made about some of the transfer targets and salaries paid. 

That said, we fans weren't complaining that much at the time I suppose.

And there, I believe, lies the crux of the matter. We didn't know the full cost of the transfers, and while it's easy with hindsight to say they shouldn't have been sanctioned, look what happened the first time O'Neill was told to rein in his spending. You can't blame Randy for sanctioning the kid in a sweetshop approach then say it's his fault the manager left.

[N'ZMAV]

I agree with the above, Randy's main fault was letting MON have too much of a say on what went on, spending, wages etc etc, it's now came back to haunt him. Heindsight is a wonderful thing though, but most of us could see that some of the toss MON was buying at the time wouldn't work out. We knew Knight wouldn't get any better, we knew Harewood wouldn't turn into a Premier League striker, and we certainly knew that Heskey was past it and wasn't worth a 3 year deal on about £3mil a year, shame Lerner didn't know any better at the time...

[N'ZMAV]

I'm probably bitter and twisted but I firmly blame the kid in the sweetshop for a lot of this, did he (MON) really think that the average players on huge wages was going to get us to the promise land? I never beleived it, no matter how close we/he thoguht we was.

[Rip Van We Go Again]

You can't blame Randy for sanctioning the kid in a sweetshop approach then say it's his fault the manager left.

I detest O'Neill, but imagine you're given free rein on comings and goings with money seemingly no object, for 4 years you've been left completely alone to run the playing side as you see fit.
Then suddenly you're told to cut back with no warning what so ever.

I'm not saying O'Neill is blameless, but it was abject stupidity for Lerner to administer a hands off approach for so long.

[dave.woodhall]

You can't blame Randy for sanctioning the kid in a sweetshop approach then say it's his fault the manager left.

I detest O'Neill, but imagine you're given free rein on comings and goings with money seemingly no object, for 4 years you've been left completely alone to run the playing side as you see fit.
Then suddenly you're told to cut back with no warning what so ever.

I'm not saying O'Neill is blameless, but it was abject stupidity for Lerner to administer a hands off approach for so long.

We don't know what warning was given, and after years of an interfering chairman always failing to make the final backing available I don't suppose we'd have been too happy to see what appeared to be history repeating itself.

[Doorbell]

It's all a bit ironic considering Randy's trade is in the financial sector...

[hawkeye]

That article reveals an absoloute disaster in terms of financial management.
To invest that amount of money and to end up in worse position than when you made the investment is damning.
It has been stated that there was no 5 year plan and this shows it. Failling to Plan is Planning to Fail. So we are left with a manger that no one wants and still a squad of over paid under performing players and this will continue to drive revenues down. Its called the law of diminishing returns and happens when a business has compounded bad decision with more bad decisions. This is a real mess.