The Takeover Thread - Recon Group - NOW WITH NEW POLL

[paul_e]

If he is staying then it's a pretty concrete sign no takeover is imminent. Which isn't to say it may not be done

But I can't see a more convincing case than to simply take things at face value. We're up for sale. No deal is done or nearly done. We may have been close previously but that may have fallen through

It doesn't look good for this season though. We'll be reliant on Okore, some people regaining their form of two years ago, some kids coming through and a small number of very good signings

So that absolutely isn't relegation as a certainty but I struggle to see us not being one of the contenders to go down for much of the season, especially without benteke.

No, it's really not, it means nothing it relation to the takeover beyond it won't be announced this week.

If the takeover is 2months away why sack the manager now?  better to have someone in place who can handle contract extensions for Delph, Vlaar, etc and can start identifying scouting targets for the world cup.  Sales of a couple of fringe players won't indicate anything either.  Where it will become interesting is if we start making first team signings, that's when it's clear that Lambert is genuinely expecting to be in place at the start of the season.

[Jarpie]

If he is staying then it's a pretty concrete sign no takeover is imminent. Which isn't to say it may not be done

But I can't see a more convincing case than to simply take things at face value. We're up for sale. No deal is done or nearly done. We may have been close previously but that may have fallen through

It doesn't look good for this season though. We'll be reliant on Okore, some people regaining their form of two years ago, some kids coming through and a small number of very good signings

So that absolutely isn't relegation as a certainty but I struggle to see us not being one of the contenders to go down for much of the season, especially without benteke.

Depends on what you mean by imminent. I'd say we're gonna get new owner in 4-6 weeks, my take is that the sale is agreed on but the legal shenanigans will take weeks to sort out, due dilligence and lawyers going over everything on both sides. They gotta earn their living too .

It makes complete sense to Lambert to stay at least till the takeover is finished, be it days or weeks. I wouldn't read anything on media saying that there's no firm buyer, the buyer would demand from the seller to keep everything confidential, and would probably have gotten people on both sides of the table to sign NDA agreements with their offer so there wouldn't be leaks.

I'll get worried if we don't have new owner by end of the world cup.

[Dante Lavelli]

If the takeover is 2months away why sack the manager now?  better to have someone in place who can handle contract extensions for Delph, Vlaar, etc and can start identifying scouting targets for the world cup.  Sales of a couple of fringe players won't indicate anything either.  Where it will become interesting is if we start making first team signings, that's when it's clear that Lambert is genuinely expecting to be in place at the start of the season.

That's a good point.  If I was a football manager I'd want to be at the World Cup scouting players and perving on girls on Ipanema beach.  I'd also want to be putting it all on expenses rather than paying for it out of my own pocket, so there are some benefits for Lambert in holding the fort for longer.

[supertom]

With the FFP rules being bought into effect now then it goes without saying that Premier League football clubs aren't quite as attractive a proposition as they were 2-3 years ago. Your average billionaire Sheik isn't gonna be able to come and use the club as it's play thing. You can't really buy your way to instant success now either.

This takeover could take a while because any potential owner will have to come with a plan and an expectation to run this club as financially self sufficient. I've no doubts someone out there can do this much better than Randy. We've got plenty of untapped market out there that we're not fully utilising. But buyers are going to be far more cautious from this point on. Same goes for any other club on the market. You're unlikely to get buyers taking a club because it's fashionable to do so.

We will get bought out at some point. It could take months, it could take years. There's just a lot more to consider now. If these restrictions happened 5-6 years ago, Man City wouldn't be where they are now.

[silhillvilla]

I don't know who Lerner takes his advice from but he really does have a tendency to not just shoot himself in the foot but blow them both off from short range with a sawn off .

[LeeB]

If he is staying then it's a pretty concrete sign no takeover is imminent. Which isn't to say it may not be done

But I can't see a more convincing case than to simply take things at face value. We're up for sale. No deal is done or nearly done. We may have been close previously but that may have fallen through

It doesn't look good for this season though. We'll be reliant on Okore, some people regaining their form of two years ago, some kids coming through and a small number of very good signings

So that absolutely isn't relegation as a certainty but I struggle to see us not being one of the contenders to go down for much of the season, especially without benteke.

We are going to be in a dogfight all season.

Interesting if there is say 15m to spend, where do you go?

I think 500k on Hoolahan, (they would sell) to give a bit more creativity, Lescott (just pay him a decent wage and get him in!) a left back, and a really strong centre mid would be my first stabs (Leroy Fer please). Get NZogbia fit and Albrighton to stay. Probably need a centre forward on loan or on a free, and a right back option on loan.

Where is that freebee list that is circulated each year?

If Nzonzi is wanting out of Stoke I'd get in there. It's doable, probably within budget, and we really could do with a big bastard in that midfield.

[PeterWithesShin]

I doubt a £50million fine, spread over 3 years (I think it was) would put off a multi billionaire.

They'll just sponsor everything they can through various companies they own for stupid money. Naming rights to VP, £100m for 6 years for starters as example.

[pauliewalnuts]

I doubt a £50million fine, spread over 3 years (I think it was) would put off a multi billionaire.

They'll just sponsor everything they can through various companies they own for stupid money. Naming rights to VP, £100m for 6 years for starters as example.

I think that overpriced naming rights ruse won't work any more - am pretty sure that's one of the things UEFA looked at, and judged Man City's deal to be mentally overpriced.

[supertom]

I doubt a £50million fine, spread over 3 years (I think it was) would put off a multi billionaire.

They'll just sponsor everything they can through various companies they own for stupid money. Naming rights to VP, £100m for 6 years for starters as example.

Probably. But I would guess a year or two down the line the punishments will become greater and points and Euro places will be taken into account perhaps. It's about time they did something more pro-active to try and level the playing field a bit.

I know in terms of buying a club now then spunking 100-150 mill net in one window is unlikely. Not that we'd remotely expect that from our potential new owner.

[PeterWithesShin]

I'm sure you could argue the naming rights as justified, how can it be proved it isn't worth £15m a year, for example?
It would be a bit different to doing a Hull and sponsoring injury time and substitutions. But doing it for £100m a year.

[paul_e]

With the FFP rules being bought into effect now then it goes without saying that Premier League football clubs aren't quite as attractive a proposition as they were 2-3 years ago. Your average billionaire Sheik isn't gonna be able to come and use the club as it's play thing. You can't really buy your way to instant success now either.

This takeover could take a while because any potential owner will have to come with a plan and an expectation to run this club as financially self sufficient. I've no doubts someone out there can do this much better than Randy. We've got plenty of untapped market out there that we're not fully utilising. But buyers are going to be far more cautious from this point on. Same goes for any other club on the market. You're unlikely to get buyers taking a club because it's fashionable to do so.

We will get bought out at some point. It could take months, it could take years. There's just a lot more to consider now. If these restrictions happened 5-6 years ago, Man City wouldn't be where they are now.

FFP rules aren't restrictive enough to be the complete game changer you're suggesting.  From our 'base' we could easily add £180m of transfers and £500k p/w of wages and still pass them without any effort.  That's not going to buy you a bunch of Messi's but you can do a couple of windows shopping with the big boys for the 15-20m targets.  That'd be enough to compete with Tottenham/Everton/Arsenal/Liverpool, Man City and Chelsea our away at the top with their squad depth and ManU earn enough that they can spend a fortune without much trouble, that really does depend on the new manager and how much the glazers throw at him though.

[pauliewalnuts]

I'm sure you could argue the naming rights as justified, how can it be proved it isn't worth £15m a year, for example?
It would be a bit different to doing a Hull and sponsoring injury time and substitutions. But doing it for £100m a year.

They look at the market value and do an evaluation of it. I'd imagine they use experts in said fields, too, so it won't just be a figure out of the blue

[nigel]

Rival forums and their shortcomings aside, the club haven't covered themselves in glory over the past week either. Why are we so amateurish at some things? Randy's statement managed to combine the melodramatic and enigmatic, which was always going to result in increased speculation and insecurity. Then we had the fly away Paul's and the furtive closing of restaurant's, again fanning the flames of speculation and conspiracy. I'm in the no deal close yet camp, and tbh, if and its a big if, that's true, Randy would have been better off dwelling silently with the Shunammite a bit longer, only making an official announcement when he had something  definite to say.

I wouldn't say that, mate.
How do the club stop people from speculating and spouting bull?
Villa are not going to release a press report every few hours saying that there's nothing to report, are they?
Or maybe they should
It's the speculators that are fanning the flames and producing all these conspiracy theories not the club.

I think something is going on, how far down the line is anyone's guess.
I'm like you, and many others, in the fact that I tire of all the bulls**t I read on various forums

[PeterWithesShin]

I'm sure you could argue the naming rights as justified, how can it be proved it isn't worth £15m a year, for example?
It would be a bit different to doing a Hull and sponsoring injury time and substitutions. But doing it for £100m a year.

They look at the market value and do an evaluation of it. I'd imagine they use experts in said fields, too, so it won't just be a figure out of the blue

When some teams are getting the money they are for shirt sponsorship you can go right to the top end though and justify it as other clubs do it. I'd be surprised if they couldn't justify £5m+ a year for renaming VP. And same kind of thing on shirt sponsorship.

[pauliewalnuts]

With the FFP rules being bought into effect now then it goes without saying that Premier League football clubs aren't quite as attractive a proposition as they were 2-3 years ago. Your average billionaire Sheik isn't gonna be able to come and use the club as it's play thing. You can't really buy your way to instant success now either.

This takeover could take a while because any potential owner will have to come with a plan and an expectation to run this club as financially self sufficient. I've no doubts someone out there can do this much better than Randy. We've got plenty of untapped market out there that we're not fully utilising. But buyers are going to be far more cautious from this point on. Same goes for any other club on the market. You're unlikely to get buyers taking a club because it's fashionable to do so.

We will get bought out at some point. It could take months, it could take years. There's just a lot more to consider now. If these restrictions happened 5-6 years ago, Man City wouldn't be where they are now.

FFP rules aren't restrictive enough to be the complete game changer you're suggesting.  From our 'base' we could easily add £180m of transfers and £500k p/w of wages and still pass them without any effort.  That's not going to buy you a bunch of Messi's but you can do a couple of windows shopping with the big boys for the 15-20m targets.  That'd be enough to compete with Tottenham/Everton/Arsenal/Liverpool, Man City and Chelsea our away at the top with their squad depth and ManU earn enough that they can spend a fortune without much trouble, that really does depend on the new manager and how much the glazers throw at him though.

I don't think  it would be that easy, to be honest. Worth noting that there are also two sets of FFP rules - the UEFA ones and the PL ones.

I appreciate that the television money is going up and that will therefore reduce losses, but I don't see there being enough wriggle room in these for that sort of spending (and losses).

Allowances here. Hard to see how we'd get away with huge spending these days:



The wages restrictions alone would stop us loading 500k a week onto our wage bill, purely because of the size of the increase.