The Takeover Thread - Recon Group - NOW WITH NEW POLL

[SoccerHQ]

Collymore wants a fan type takeover, says something about a 49/51 %  fan/invester ownership

I know it's been done elsewhere but I don't understand it

So can someone just organise this, thanks
(I would but I don't know what I'm doing)

It's a romantic idea but the trouble is that is a new takeover and people will want us to splash the cash significantly again...or at least within the parameters of FFP.

Could a fans takeover really provide more funds than the say 20m net we spend under Lerner these days? I don't see how a fans ownership could get us back competing with the top 6.

[Damo70]

I imagine there are three reasons foreign billionaires buy Premier League clubs - (1) they want to show off to their mates that they've got a Premier League club - any London club or Man Utd/Liverpool are much better for this than the Villa, (2) they want to make a bit of cash (the relative lack of spare capacity in our ground and our historically average attendances, not to mention our greatest period of success being before TV was invented so we don't have a massive global fanbase make this very difficult), (3) they're doing it for more unscrupulous reasons (rumours have always circulated as to the real reason the Russian bought Chelsea).

I don't disagree with the general point, but where do Man City fit in there?

If any fits them, it would probably be number 1, and if that is the case, Villa would have been just a good a choice as Man City before Mansour bought them.

As it turns out, not only have they thrown huge amounts of money at City, they've also been pretty much model owners.

I am not saying it is going to happen to us - and, in fact, FFP means that even if someone wanted to spend huge amounts on us, they'd struggle to do so - just that sometimes when people do invest in PL clubs, they can do so with good intentions.

Just our luck that they wanted a real challenge and thought making City more successful than United was a bigger challenge than keeping Villa more successful than Small Heath.

[Ad@m]

I imagine there are three reasons foreign billionaires buy Premier League clubs - (1) they want to show off to their mates that they've got a Premier League club - any London club or Man Utd/Liverpool are much better for this than the Villa, (2) they want to make a bit of cash (the relative lack of spare capacity in our ground and our historically average attendances, not to mention our greatest period of success being before TV was invented so we don't have a massive global fanbase make this very difficult), (3) they're doing it for more unscrupulous reasons (rumours have always circulated as to the real reason the Russian bought Chelsea).

I don't disagree with the general point, but where do Man City fit in there?

If any fits them, it would probably be number 1, and if that is the case, Villa would have been just a good a choice as Man City before Mansour bought them.

As it turns out, not only have they thrown huge amounts of money at City, they've also been pretty much model owners.

I am not saying it is going to happen to us - and, in fact, FFP means that even if someone wanted to spend huge amounts on us, they'd struggle to do so - just that sometimes when people do invest in PL clubs, they can do so with good intentions.

You're right - Man City was a strange one but maybe it was as simple as the new ground as Dave suggests.  And like you rightly point out, FFP makes buying a club like the Villa even less attractive as the chances of making any (serious) money out of us is virtually nil.

I suspect this is why Randy's struggling to find anyone to take us off his hands.

[Dante Lavelli]

I dunno, with the TV money as it is, a well run club can run at a profit.  Spurs, Newcastle even WBA have consistently (I think) broken even in the last few years.  There is talk that Friday night football will be included in the next TV deal so there will be another big bounce in the amount of money each club will get.  That's ignoring the slim chance of getting the champions league bounty.

The clever/hard bit is keeping the wages down at a reasonable level which inevitably means selling star players every now and again.

[pauliewalnuts]

I dunno, with the TV money as it is, a well run club can run at a profit.  Spurs, Newcastle even WBA have consistently (I think) broken even in the last few years.  T

Newcastle are massively in debt to Ashley. If they are making any profit now, it'll take a long, long time until they pay back the hole he dragged them out of.

[Ad@m]

I dunno, with the TV money as it is, a well run club can run at a profit.  Spurs, Newcastle even WBA have consistently (I think) broken even in the last few years.  There is talk that Friday night football will be included in the next TV deal so there will be another big bounce in the amount of money each club will get.  That's ignoring the slim chance of getting the champions league bounty.

The clever/hard bit is keeping the wages down at a reasonable level which inevitably means selling star players every now and again.

At the start of the 90s before Sky came on the scene if you told all the Chairmen of the 1st Division clubs that they would get a tenth of the TV money the Premier League gets now they would've thought it impossible NOT to make millions out of it.  The last 20 years has shown that almost all of that money flows straight through the clubs and in to the pockets of the players and their agents.  Top flight clubs in England are more in debt than they've ever been, despite all the TV money coming in.

In fact, the only other person I think who has made money out of the introduction of Sky to English football is our very own HDE!

[dave.woodhall]

I dunno, with the TV money as it is, a well run club can run at a profit.  Spurs, Newcastle even WBA have consistently (I think) broken even in the last few years.  There is talk that Friday night football will be included in the next TV deal so there will be another big bounce in the amount of money each club will get.  That's ignoring the slim chance of getting the champions league bounty.

The clever/hard bit is keeping the wages down at a reasonable level which inevitably means selling star players every now and again.

At the start of the 90s before Sky came on the scene if you told all the Chairmen of the 1st Division clubs that they would get a tenth of the TV money the Premier League gets now they would've thought it impossible NOT to make millions out of it.  The last 20 years has shown that almost all of that money flows straight through the clubs and in to the pockets of the players and their agents.  Top flight clubs in England are more in debt than they've ever been, despite all the TV money coming in.

In fact, the only other person I think who has made money out of the introduction of Sky to English football is our very own HDE!

Quite a few of the club owners who voted for the Premier League made serious money out of it. Read David Conn's The Football Business for a few examples; some of them made Ellis look ethical.

[Ad@m]

I dunno, with the TV money as it is, a well run club can run at a profit.  Spurs, Newcastle even WBA have consistently (I think) broken even in the last few years.  There is talk that Friday night football will be included in the next TV deal so there will be another big bounce in the amount of money each club will get.  That's ignoring the slim chance of getting the champions league bounty.

The clever/hard bit is keeping the wages down at a reasonable level which inevitably means selling star players every now and again.

At the start of the 90s before Sky came on the scene if you told all the Chairmen of the 1st Division clubs that they would get a tenth of the TV money the Premier League gets now they would've thought it impossible NOT to make millions out of it.  The last 20 years has shown that almost all of that money flows straight through the clubs and in to the pockets of the players and their agents.  Top flight clubs in England are more in debt than they've ever been, despite all the TV money coming in.

In fact, the only other person I think who has made money out of the introduction of Sky to English football is our very own HDE!

Quite a few of the club owners who voted for the Premier League made serious money out of it. Read David Conn's The Football Business for a few examples; some of them made Ellis look ethical.

Steady on - I won't have those sorts of things said about Herbert!

The point still stands though - someone joining the party now has got sod all chance of making any money out of any club outside of the Sky 6.

[LeeB]

Fox News are reporting that ISIS/ISIL are planning a takeover the club, with the exclusively Muslim fan base exited by the promise to conquer Europe within two seasons.





Probably.

[Ad@m]

Fox News are reporting that ISIS/ISIL are planning a takeover the club, with the exclusively Muslim fan base exited by the promise to conquer Europe within two seasons.





Probably.

If they make us wear burqas to games can I have one that lets no light whatsoever through to the eyes!!!

[dave.woodhall]

Steady on - I won't have those sorts of things said about Herbert!

The point still stands though - someone joining the party now has got sod all chance of making any money out of any club outside of the Sky 6.

What; that he wasn't the most unethical owner?

[Ad@m]

Steady on - I won't have those sorts of things said about Herbert!

The point still stands though - someone joining the party now has got sod all chance of making any money out of any club outside of the Sky 6.

What; that he wasn't the most unethical owner?

It was rather tongue in cheek - I'd like to keep my view that HDE has been the single biggest anchor, dragging us back on our path to success as a result of his focus on lining his own pockets over supporting the club to do what it was capable of.  To suggest there were more twattish chairmen out there at that time doesn't sit well with me!!!

[dave.woodhall]

Steady on - I won't have those sorts of things said about Herbert!

The point still stands though - someone joining the party now has got sod all chance of making any money out of any club outside of the Sky 6.

What; that he wasn't the most unethical owner?

It was rather tongue in cheek - I'd like to keep my view that HDE has been the single biggest anchor, dragging us back on our path to success as a result of his focus on lining his own pockets over supporting the club to do what it was capable of.  To suggest there were more twattish chairmen out there at that time doesn't sit well with me!!!

I'd agree with your first sentence but people like Ken Bates and Dave Richards made him look like a WI jumble sale organiser.

[hilts_coolerking]

The point still stands though - someone joining the party now has got sod all chance of making any money out of any club outside of the Sky 6.

That's the paradox innit:  in order to make any money out of football you'd have to be as rich as Croesus.

[Ad@m]

The point still stands though - someone joining the party now has got sod all chance of making any money out of any club outside of the Sky 6.

That's the paradox innit:  in order to make any money out of football you'd have to be as rich as Croesus.

But even he couldn't now - FFP has pulled the drawbridge up behind those that are already there.