The Takeover Thread - Recon Group - NOW WITH NEW POLL

[paul_e]

i'd be delighted if Allen just became a benefactor and left day to day for someone else. Bit like Henry at Liverpool who is really a baseball man. I don't get all the angst over whether Randy goes to games or not. I'm pretty sure Sheik Mansoor doesn't. But they have in place good people to run the club which is critical if we are to move forward, with or without Randy.

I just don't see how Allen is an option at this point, to be truthful.

Living in Seattle and enjoying what the Seahawks are doing right now (I went to the NFC Championship and it was bonkers), he's up to his eyeballs in a program that has gone to back-to-back Super Bowls. Add to it the fact that he also owns the Portland Trailblazers - I just don't see why he would want to stick his neck out in Brum, even at a discount. It would be a curious purchase at best.

I think the biggest point working against Villa is that Allen simply isn't a soccer man. I don't know how much of one Lerner was when he bought the Villa, but Allen's interest is cursory at best. His involvement in Sounders is nil, other than he has a share in the interest because the Sounders play their matches where the Seahawks do - CenturyLink - and Allen saved the NFL in Seattle because he sold the taxpayers on a stadium that would be used by both American Football AND Soccer.

But all things being equal, he doesn't have any involvement in hardly any aspect of what the Sounders do, especially day-to-day.

Again, there's nothing stopping him from buying the club and then handing it off to Fox, et al and just setting the thing on auto pilot, but that hasn't been his style. He raised the 12th Man Flag before Sunday's NFC Championship game and is revered around the city of Seattle for what he's done for the professional teams here.

I'd be thrilled if he was the one to pick up the mantle from Lerner, but it doesn't seem to match Allen's MO or personality.

-C.

Interesting except none of that ties up with him having had discussions over buying Southampton a few years back which suggests there's at least some interest in the league, specifically toward 'distressed assets' as Southampton were at the time.

[Percy McCarthy]

i'd be delighted if Allen just became a benefactor and left day to day for someone else. Bit like Henry at Liverpool who is really a baseball man. I don't get all the angst over whether Randy goes to games or not. I'm pretty sure Sheik Mansoor doesn't. But they have in place good people to run the club which is critical if we are to move forward, with or without Randy.

I just don't see how Allen is an option at this point, to be truthful.

Living in Seattle and enjoying what the Seahawks are doing right now (I went to the NFC Championship and it was bonkers), he's up to his eyeballs in a program that has gone to back-to-back Super Bowls. Add to it the fact that he also owns the Portland Trailblazers - I just don't see why he would want to stick his neck out in Brum, even at a discount. It would be a curious purchase at best.

I think the biggest point working against Villa is that Allen simply isn't a soccer man. I don't know how much of one Lerner was when he bought the Villa, but Allen's interest is cursory at best. His involvement in Sounders is nil, other than he has a share in the interest because the Sounders play their matches where the Seahawks do - CenturyLink - and Allen saved the NFL in Seattle because he sold the taxpayers on a stadium that would be used by both American Football AND Soccer.

But all things being equal, he doesn't have any involvement in hardly any aspect of what the Sounders do, especially day-to-day.

Again, there's nothing stopping him from buying the club and then handing it off to Fox, et al and just setting the thing on auto pilot, but that hasn't been his style. He raised the 12th Man Flag before Sunday's NFC Championship game and is revered around the city of Seattle for what he's done for the professional teams here.

I'd be thrilled if he was the one to pick up the mantle from Lerner, but it doesn't seem to match Allen's MO or personality.

-C.

You could be right and I suspect you probably are. However, there is at least a case to be made why it could be true.

As a multi-billionaire owner of a few sports clubs, it is inconcievable that he has not been sounded out by Bank of America. As an NFL owner, it is possible he knows Randy and may have spoken to him personally.

As a serial investor, he (or his advisors) may well be aware that in recent months Birmingham has been named by three different sets of investment experts as the best foreign direct investment destination in the world, the second best in Western Europe, and the most investable city in the UK, ahead of London.

Further investigation would reveal to him (or any other prospective owner) that we are the biggest club, in the biggest regional city, in the richest football economy on earth.

Maybe the fact that we are owned by a fellow-American helps (is Fox American too)? Then there's the Southampton interest.

Fingers crossed anyway.

[Ads]

I played football last night and started contemplating something. We narrowly lost our first game to top of the league after Christmas, while we destroyed last week’s opposition and annihilated this weeks.

Aston Villa can’t compete with Chelsea and Man City financially or Man United and Arsenal. Chelsea are the best side in the country, with Man City a close second and with the financial resources to compete with the very best in Europe.

In the league though, you will play them four times with a maximum 12 points at stake. There seems to be common agreement that the league really has several tranches to it, with say 12 sides of poor to middling quality who all scrabble around. You have two very good sides at the top, two or three sides who can be very good on their day and then sides who make up the middle bracket.

Teams like Leicester and Burnley are only passing through the league and will be replaced by equally limited sides year in year out. Others like QPR and Hull stick around for a bit before doing much the same. Others towards the top of that middling 12, such as Stoke can be very in an out.

All this we know. So if you’re a prospective owner and you’re being asked the spend £150 million to buy Aston Villa, the common thought is that “you’d need to spend the same again to compete”. But do you?

This centres round what we mean when we say compete and there are likely differences between what we as fans desire or expect against what an owner may define the term as. If you’re an American, say Allen for example, then you may wish to see a return at some point on your investment and that means Champions League football. So how do you get there? “The ladder has been pulled up” is a phrase I and many others use quite a lot, but its only part true.

To get there you need a plan and Randy Lerner’s plan, as a billionaire and a half, was to give one footballing man both his implicit trust and crucially, £200 million to achieve that. Circumstances change and the rest is history, so we need a new plan.

I return to my few original paragraphs. To compete doesn’t mean you need to take on Chelsea and Man City pound for pound financially. What you need to do is be better than that group of 12 poor to middling sides. Over the last five seasons, you have needed, on average 69.9 points to finish 4th and these sides have scored on average 67.6 goals. This equates to 23 wins, less if you draw some games, while it equates to 1.7 goals per game.

To simplify matters, those 12 poor to middling teams from the bottom up offer you 72 points, which would be enough to get you 4th. Of course, we know football isn’t as straight forward as that, but statistically that is what is on offer points wise. You could, theoretically lose every game to the rest of the top 8, as long as you beat the bottom 12, you will finish 4th. So what you need to become is a flat track bully, as the likes of West Ham and Southampton have done this year. This has taken them out of that 12 team bracket and it hasn’t required significant outlay.

You have to invest obviously and that is our problem, we simply don’t do this, while our manager is poor and incapable of getting us up the league. There isn’t the expertise on the board and there isn’t a collective ambition and desire to achieve and “compete”. The manager is poor and getting less out of a squad which has a good deal of quality and should be closer to the top of that 12. So if a new owner were to come during the summer, it may take less than you think to get you competing and this is how it should be sold, because there is such a lack of quality amongst at least 60% of the league, that it doesn’t take much to get your ahead.

[The Laughing Policeman]

I will believe it when the ink is dry on the contract...

http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/aston-villa-gossip-microsoft-billionaire-8482194

UTV
The Doc

The photo of him at the top of the article is the most 90s any person has ever looked.

it's pathetic that the Mail couldn't even be arsed to come up with a recent picture

This is his boat.



I want to look down my nose at that kind of crass display of wealth, but goddamn its impressive.

Can work start on dredging the river Tame, that's never going to fit on the Witton stretch.

He could always park it in the Gas St. Basin then catch the No.7 to Villa Park.
Heard from an American friend a few days ago that there are rumours over there that Allen has been looking at a few English clubs that are up for sale or clubs where the owners could be persuaded to sell.
As with all these rumours I'll believe it when and if it happens.

[Ads]

Sure that's a fancy looking boat, but could he sail it round the Horn of Africa on a cold and wet Tueday night in January?

[The Laughing Policeman]

Knowing our luck it'll turn out that it's the former Wet Spammer Paul Allen that's trying to buy us.

[Jimbo]

I played football last night and started contemplating something. We narrowly lost our first game to top of the league after Christmas, while we destroyed last week’s opposition and annihilated this weeks.

Aston Villa can’t compete with Chelsea and Man City financially or Man United and Arsenal. Chelsea are the best side in the country, with Man City a close second and with the financial resources to compete with the very best in Europe.

In the league though, you will play them four times with a maximum 12 points at stake. There seems to be common agreement that the league really has several tranches to it, with say 12 sides of poor to middling quality who all scrabble around. You have two very good sides at the top, two or three sides who can be very good on their day and then sides who make up the middle bracket.

Teams like Leicester and Burnley are only passing through the league and will be replaced by equally limited sides year in year out. Others like QPR and Hull stick around for a bit before doing much the same. Others towards the top of that middling 12, such as Stoke can be very in an out.

All this we know. So if you’re a prospective owner and you’re being asked the spend £150 million to buy Aston Villa, the common thought is that “you’d need to spend the same again to compete”. But do you?

This centres round what we mean when we say compete and there are likely differences between what we as fans desire or expect against what an owner may define the term as. If you’re an American, say Allen for example, then you may wish to see a return at some point on your investment and that means Champions League football. So how do you get there? “The ladder has been pulled up” is a phrase I and many others use quite a lot, but its only part true.

To get there you need a plan and Randy Lerner’s plan, as a billionaire and a half, was to give one footballing man both his implicit trust and crucially, £200 million to achieve that. Circumstances change and the rest is history, so we need a new plan.

I return to my few original paragraphs. To compete doesn’t mean you need to take on Chelsea and Man City pound for pound financially. What you need to do is be better than that group of 12 poor to middling sides. Over the last five seasons, you have needed, on average 69.9 points to finish 4th and these sides have scored on average 67.6 goals. This equates to 23 wins, less if you draw some games, while it equates to 1.7 goals per game.

To simplify matters, those 12 poor to middling teams from the bottom up offer you 72 points, which would be enough to get you 4th. Of course, we know football isn’t as straight forward as that, but statistically that is what is on offer points wise. You could, theoretically lose every game to the rest of the top 8, as long as you beat the bottom 12, you will finish 4th. So what you need to become is a flat track bully, as the likes of West Ham and Southampton have done this year. This has taken them out of that 12 team bracket and it hasn’t required significant outlay.

You have to invest obviously and that is our problem, we simply don’t do this, while our manager is poor and incapable of getting us up the league. There isn’t the expertise on the board and there isn’t a collective ambition and desire to achieve and “compete”. The manager is poor and getting less out of a squad which has a good deal of quality and should be closer to the top of that 12. So if a new owner were to come during the summer, it may take less than you think to get you competing and this is how it should be sold, because there is such a lack of quality amongst at least 60% of the league, that it doesn’t take much to get your ahead.

I take it you were in goal?

[paul_e]

To follow on from what Ads has posted it's worth paying attention to the rules, which actually support a slow build over 3-4years rather than a huge splurge approach.

However they all relate to turnover to a large extent so...

spending cap - Maximum permitted loss £105m over 3 seasons
Wage cap - none below £52m increase above that is limited to £4m+revenue from commercial deals.

So from where we are the solution is to get a decent way below that £52m and then replace the kit and shirt deals as well as possible, a high profile owner with a big flashy launch, etc might well see those increase.  This sees us give ourselves a lot of 'wiggle room' on wages and the spending cap is a 3 year thing so no great issue in the first summer.

2nd season the improved position sees the spending cap limit eased naturally and then you sign sponsors for the ground, etc to increade the wage cap within the rules and have another decent spend.

By the 3rd season you'd be hoping to have shown real improvement and be up pushing for europe at the least and then you can look to renegotiate the sponsorship deals, etc and start to see a natural commercial growth which then becomes the key focus to ensure that by years 4 and 5 the wage cap and spending cap restrictions start to become handled by the commercial side with the need for huge cash injections from the owner.  Becoming a major 'brand' becomes the key rather than having a rich owner, the rich owner just helps for the first couple of years whilst you get back on track.

This ties in with what Fox is doing and saying and means that a takeover in place for this summer is very well timed because of the new sponsor deals we'll have to take anyway, getting a good boost on those solves a whole heap of problems.

[dave shelley]

I hope this works.  This would be an ideal mooring for Paul Allen's boat.

http://www.pbase.com/beppuu/image/40395930

[frankmosswasmyuncle]

I played football last night and started contemplating something. We narrowly lost our first game to top of the league after Christmas, while we destroyed last week’s opposition and annihilated this weeks.

Aston Villa can’t compete with Chelsea and Man City financially or Man United and Arsenal. Chelsea are the best side in the country, with Man City a close second and with the financial resources to compete with the very best in Europe.

In the league though, you will play them four times with a maximum 12 points at stake. There seems to be common agreement that the league really has several tranches to it, with say 12 sides of poor to middling quality who all scrabble around. You have two very good sides at the top, two or three sides who can be very good on their day and then sides who make up the middle bracket.

Teams like Leicester and Burnley are only passing through the league and will be replaced by equally limited sides year in year out. Others like QPR and Hull stick around for a bit before doing much the same. Others towards the top of that middling 12, such as Stoke can be very in an out.

All this we know. So if you’re a prospective owner and you’re being asked the spend £150 million to buy Aston Villa, the common thought is that “you’d need to spend the same again to compete”. But do you?

This centres round what we mean when we say compete and there are likely differences between what we as fans desire or expect against what an owner may define the term as. If you’re an American, say Allen for example, then you may wish to see a return at some point on your investment and that means Champions League football. So how do you get there? “The ladder has been pulled up” is a phrase I and many others use quite a lot, but its only part true.

To get there you need a plan and Randy Lerner’s plan, as a billionaire and a half, was to give one footballing man both his implicit trust and crucially, £200 million to achieve that. Circumstances change and the rest is history, so we need a new plan.

I return to my few original paragraphs. To compete doesn’t mean you need to take on Chelsea and Man City pound for pound financially. What you need to do is be better than that group of 12 poor to middling sides. Over the last five seasons, you have needed, on average 69.9 points to finish 4th and these sides have scored on average 67.6 goals. This equates to 23 wins, less if you draw some games, while it equates to 1.7 goals per game.

To simplify matters, those 12 poor to middling teams from the bottom up offer you 72 points, which would be enough to get you 4th. Of course, we know football isn’t as straight forward as that, but statistically that is what is on offer points wise. You could, theoretically lose every game to the rest of the top 8, as long as you beat the bottom 12, you will finish 4th. So what you need to become is a flat track bully, as the likes of West Ham and Southampton have done this year. This has taken them out of that 12 team bracket and it hasn’t required significant outlay.

You have to invest obviously and that is our problem, we simply don’t do this, while our manager is poor and incapable of getting us up the league. There isn’t the expertise on the board and there isn’t a collective ambition and desire to achieve and “compete”. The manager is poor and getting less out of a squad which has a good deal of quality and should be closer to the top of that 12. So if a new owner were to come during the summer, it may take less than you think to get you competing and this is how it should be sold, because there is such a lack of quality amongst at least 60% of the league, that it doesn’t take much to get your ahead.

I take it you were in goal?

On the bench.
Again.

[joe_c]

Sure that's a fancy looking boat, but could he sail it round the Horn of Africa on a cold and wet Tueday night in January?

Looks like Robert Maxwell's boat.

[exigo]

With Allen taking over, suddenly Lambert's assistant becomes obvious.

[Ian.]

I played football last night and started contemplating something. We narrowly lost our first game to top of the league after Christmas, while we destroyed last week’s opposition and annihilated this weeks.

Aston Villa can’t compete with Chelsea and Man City financially or Man United and Arsenal. Chelsea are the best side in the country, with Man City a close second and with the financial resources to compete with the very best in Europe.

In the league though, you will play them four times with a maximum 12 points at stake. There seems to be common agreement that the league really has several tranches to it, with say 12 sides of poor to middling quality who all scrabble around. You have two very good sides at the top, two or three sides who can be very good on their day and then sides who make up the middle bracket.

Teams like Leicester and Burnley are only passing through the league and will be replaced by equally limited sides year in year out. Others like QPR and Hull stick around for a bit before doing much the same. Others towards the top of that middling 12, such as Stoke can be very in an out.

All this we know. So if you’re a prospective owner and you’re being asked the spend £150 million to buy Aston Villa, the common thought is that “you’d need to spend the same again to compete”. But do you?

This centres round what we mean when we say compete and there are likely differences between what we as fans desire or expect against what an owner may define the term as. If you’re an American, say Allen for example, then you may wish to see a return at some point on your investment and that means Champions League football. So how do you get there? “The ladder has been pulled up” is a phrase I and many others use quite a lot, but its only part true.

To get there you need a plan and Randy Lerner’s plan, as a billionaire and a half, was to give one footballing man both his implicit trust and crucially, £200 million to achieve that. Circumstances change and the rest is history, so we need a new plan.

I return to my few original paragraphs. To compete doesn’t mean you need to take on Chelsea and Man City pound for pound financially. What you need to do is be better than that group of 12 poor to middling sides. Over the last five seasons, you have needed, on average 69.9 points to finish 4th and these sides have scored on average 67.6 goals. This equates to 23 wins, less if you draw some games, while it equates to 1.7 goals per game.

To simplify matters, those 12 poor to middling teams from the bottom up offer you 72 points, which would be enough to get you 4th. Of course, we know football isn’t as straight forward as that, but statistically that is what is on offer points wise. You could, theoretically lose every game to the rest of the top 8, as long as you beat the bottom 12, you will finish 4th. So what you need to become is a flat track bully, as the likes of West Ham and Southampton have done this year. This has taken them out of that 12 team bracket and it hasn’t required significant outlay.

You have to invest obviously and that is our problem, we simply don’t do this, while our manager is poor and incapable of getting us up the league. There isn’t the expertise on the board and there isn’t a collective ambition and desire to achieve and “compete”. The manager is poor and getting less out of a squad which has a good deal of quality and should be closer to the top of that 12. So if a new owner were to come during the summer, it may take less than you think to get you competing and this is how it should be sold, because there is such a lack of quality amongst at least 60% of the league, that it doesn’t take much to get your ahead.

I take it you were in goal?

On the bench.
Again.

I'd imagine these are the same thoughts going through Benteke's head while he's playing while the rest of the team are paying keep ball on our 18 yard box.

[Dante Lavelli]

i'd be delighted if Allen just became a benefactor and left day to day for someone else. Bit like Henry at Liverpool who is really a baseball man. I don't get all the angst over whether Randy goes to games or not. I'm pretty sure Sheik Mansoor doesn't. But they have in place good people to run the club which is critical if we are to move forward, with or without Randy.

ditto - Randy could do the same.  Joe Lewis probably hands over less money to Levy each season than Randy goes to Villa.  But because Levy provides leadership and vision the money is better spent.  I'm not saying Levy is ideal but it shows that having an absent owner is not necessarily a problem.   

[Clampy]

i'd be delighted if Allen just became a benefactor and left day to day for someone else. Bit like Henry at Liverpool who is really a baseball man. I don't get all the angst over whether Randy goes to games or not. I'm pretty sure Sheik Mansoor doesn't. But they have in place good people to run the club which is critical if we are to move forward, with or without Randy.

ditto - Randy could do the same.  Joe Lewis probably hands over less money to Levy each season than Randy goes to Villa.  But because Levy provides leadership and vision the money is better spent.  I'm not saying Levy is ideal but it shows that having an absent owner is not necessarily a problem.   

Apart from Eriksen and maybe Chadli, spurs spent that Bale money woefully.