Randy Lerner

[Locko]

I'm expecting  another loss. We're running a surplus on player trading, but prize money will be static, then there is interest on loans from RAL and the management fee charged by RAL,  will Sherwood's and Lambert 's pay offs show in this years accounts?

All of which have been waived apart from the first (maybe 2?) years.

After the conversion of loans to equity, what does the club still owe RAL? isn't it over a £100m?

[wittonwarrior]

The truth about his failure is probably a mish mash of certain ingredients.

Certainly as top dog Lerner needs to have a hard look at  himself.  He was sold down the river with Mon's spending but some poor executive appointments exposed him to problems some of which could have been averted.

Lerner probably thought there was money to be made from this football business - no there isn't - its turning into a rich man's playground. 

As for the new song Lerner wants out - so why sing about it?  It's only fair though fair from his  point of view that he sticks it out for a decent price. 

[Villa in Denmark]

I'm expecting  another loss. We're running a surplus on player trading, but prize money will be static, then there is interest on loans from RAL and the management fee charged by RAL,  will Sherwood's and Lambert 's pay offs show in this years accounts?

All of which have been waived apart from the first (maybe 2?) years.

After the conversion of loans to equity, what does the club still owe RAL? isn't it over a £100m?

It's around the £100M mark from memory.

But that's irrelevant for paying interest if he's waiving it as he has done the past 6-7 years.

[Locko]

I'm expecting  another loss. We're running a surplus on player trading, but prize money will be static, then there is interest on loans from RAL and the management fee charged by RAL,  will Sherwood's and Lambert 's pay offs show in this years accounts?

All of which have been waived apart from the first (maybe 2?) years.

After the conversion of loans to equity, what does the club still owe RAL? isn't it over a £100m?

It's around the £100M mark from memory.

But that's irrelevant for paying interest if he's waiving it as he has done the past 6-7 years.

So, if I read the situation correctly if Randy sells he can either sell the club and the new owners take on the debt or he includes the debt in the asking price. Either is quite unpalatable, in scenario a, we get sold at a  reduced price and the new owners have to service the debt or in scenario b the asking price is so high for a championship club there will be no takers. A opens the door to all manner of chancers and in B we're stuck with the schmuck. All of which is as enticing as a dog shit sandwich. What a fucking mess.

[Villa in Denmark]

I'm expecting  another loss. We're running a surplus on player trading, but prize money will be static, then there is interest on loans from RAL and the management fee charged by RAL,  will Sherwood's and Lambert 's pay offs show in this years accounts?

All of which have been waived apart from the first (maybe 2?) years.

After the conversion of loans to equity, what does the club still owe RAL? isn't it over a £100m?

It's around the £100M mark from memory.

But that's irrelevant for paying interest if he's waiving it as he has done the past 6-7 years.

So, if I read the situation correctly if Randy sells he can either sell the club and the new owners take on the debt or he includes the debt in the asking price. Either is quite unpalatable in scenario a, we get sold at a  reduced price and the new owners have to service the debt or in scenario b the asking price is so high for a championship club there will be no takers. A opens the door to all manner of chancers and in B we're stuck with the schmuck. All of which is as palatable as a dog shit sandwich. What a fucking mess.

Or given that he's written down the debt continuously over the last 3 years he writes the debt off.

[pauliewalnuts]

He's utterly incompetent and reckless with it but there's no doubt he has lost enormous amounts of money.

A fool and his money.....

[Locko]

I'm expecting  another loss. We're running a surplus on player trading, but prize money will be static, then there is interest on loans from RAL and the management fee charged by RAL,  will Sherwood's and Lambert 's pay offs show in this years accounts?

All of which have been waived apart from the first (maybe 2?) years.

After the conversion of loans to equity, what does the club still owe RAL? isn't it over a £100m?

It's around the £100M mark from memory.

But that's irrelevant for paying interest if he's waiving it as he has done the past 6-7 years.

So, if I read the situation correctly if Randy sells he can either sell the club and the new owners take on the debt or he includes the debt in the asking price. Either is quite unpalatable in scenario a, we get sold at a  reduced price and the new owners have to service the debt or in scenario b the asking price is so high for a championship club there will be no takers. A opens the door to all manner of chancers and in B we're stuck with the schmuck. All of which is as palatable as a dog shit sandwich. What a fucking mess.

Or given that he's written down the debt continuously over the last 3 years he writes the debt off.

VID,  like your option best, but I feel this is the least likely scenario. A rational man would look to salvage what he can. It's analogous to me taking up golf realising I'll never get my handicap down because I'm just shit at the game. I wouldn't chuck the clubs in a skip, I'd stick 'em on eBay. Perhaps I'm ascribing more sense to Lerner than is due. Based on my analogy a more realistic outcome based on past behaviour for Randy, would be sling the clubs in the skip, chin the golf club chairman, then burn down the clubhouse whilst on CCTV

[Des Little]

The proud name and history of this fantastic football club have been besmirched by Lerner and his board of incompetent arseholes. What a legacy.

[DaveD]

We'd be better off arguing about the meaning of semantics.

Don't be ridiculous. It's clearly the semantics of meaning.

[croatian]

We'd be better off arguing about the meaning of semantics.

Don't be ridiculous. It's clearly the semantics of meaning.

Isn't it indubitably the same thing?

PS If there's any Rt Hon Members of Parliament excitedly reading this, we're not discussing semen-antics.

[AVH87]

Spending 90 minutes reading the accounts when they come out will be more interesting than 90 minutes watching us play.

[MadKev]

RL ain't that bad a bloke really, I'm one of a few who can't see why he's solely to blame for the mess we're in.

He invested lots into this club for a number of years, it's not his fault that most of our better players always want to move on, it's natural progression for players.

The players have a lot to answer to.

[aev]

RL ain't that bad a bloke really, I'm one of a few who can't see why he's solely to blame for the mess we're in.

He invested lots into this club for a number of years, it's not his fault that most of our better players always want to move on, it's natural progression for players.

The players have a lot to answer to.

Who are the others Randolph, your close family?

[ClaretAndBlueBlood]

RL ain't that bad a bloke really, I'm one of a few who can't see why he's solely to blame for the mess we're in.

He invested lots into this club for a number of years, it's not his fault that most of our better players always want to move on, it's natural progression for players.

The players have a lot to answer to.

welcome back General

[ExclDawg]

Well, I'm not related to Lerner in anyway, but I will take the unpopular position, so feel free to rip me a new one.   I'm a fan of the team specifically because of Lerner.  He owned the Browns when he bought Villa, and I've been a life-long Browns fan.  I wanted to pull for an English Football team around the same time, and how could you not like Villa?  So, his choice was my choice.  He's since helped run the Browns into the ground and hasn't done much better for Villa, so believe me, I have no specific loyalty to Lerner in particular.

When he first bought the team, I think he took a calculated risk.  His goal was to invest a lot in the team initially, get them into the Champions league, tap into the up-and-coming American revenue stream by giving them a "Champions League" team, and then let the money sustain itself.  You could sort of see the plan the first couple of years.  He spent lots of money trying to build a Europe-quality team.  He brought in some American keepers to help build that bridge to the States.  He had a couple of pre-season games in the US trying to build up interest.  He kept putting forth proposals to renovate and expand the Park to hold the new swell of fans we'd have when we started becoming one of those "Big Clubs".

Instead, it blew up in his face and turned into a bunch of "What If's" ...

What if Martin Laursen hadn't started getting injured in the 2008-2009 season?  I believe we were 2nd at the table at one point, mid-way through season.  Laursen was a huge cog in the middle of that Defence and would also come up huge in the attack at times as well.  Say he stays healthy.  Do we finish top 4?  Does that put us into Champs League and suddenly the bills are paying themselves?

What if Martin O'Neill actually used his bench and stopped running our starting 11 ragged?  Would we get out of March alive?  Would one of those 2007-2010 teams finished top 4?

What if Lerner had curbed MON's bench spending a little bit earlier?  Or at least bitten the bullet until after the 2010-2011 season?  Could he have taken the whole season to shop for a new manager rather than throwing in a quick fix?  Could MON taken that 2010-11 team and finally get over the hump?

Instead, it was that 2010 season that signed our death warrant.  MON quit a week before the season started.  Lerner scrambled to find someone to replace him.  And everything spiraled after that.  The wins stopped coming because Houiller was playing with a team built for MON.  The money stopped coming because we were suddenly a mid-level team.  Our best players wanted out, because the wins weren't coming, and the money wasn't there any more.  Lerner couldn't afford any new players because the money wasn't there.  Plus he had a bench full of over-paid bums because MON handed out bad contracts like candy.  The plan had backfired.

From there, there was nowhere to go.  He had a bloated payroll and no manager that really wanted the job ... mostly because the job description was, "Cut this payroll in-half, and improve our record to drive up revenue again".  So yeah, we were screwed at this point.  It took us years to wipe MON's bench bums off the books.  In the mean-time we went through a manager a year and players wanted out pretty much as soon as they could.  Lerner saw the writing on the wall years ago, but can't even sell the team, because other billionaires can also see the dumpster fire that's in progress.

So as far as blame?  I don't know.  I'd probably put much more of it on MON than anyone.  He's the one that Lerner handed the car-keys, only to have him total the car.  Say you spend all your money buying a Formula One Car.  You invest top dollar on all the best parts and fuel for hit, hand it to your driver and he wrecks the car, then quits the next day.  You either have to spend just as much to repair the car or run in damaged with a new driver and hope you can win some races to pay for the repairs.  Does that make you a bad owner?  I don't know.  It's hard to run well with a totaled car and it's also pretty hard to sell it for the price you think it's worth when it's all banged up. 

All I know is that nobody had a problem with Lerner during those 2006-2010 seasons.  Dare I say it ... most people probably liked him.  Then when the team came back a smoldering mess in that 2011 season, everyone turned on Lerner.  I don't know what he could of done differently though.  Had he spent hundreds of millions to "fix" the mess that was left over in 2011-12 then maybe he would of turned things around ... but wouldn't you of asked, "Why didn't he spend all that money a few years earlier?"

The funny thing (well, not so funny thing) ... Browns fans demanded for years for Lerner to sell the team.  In our minds he was a nonchalant owner that never cared enough to actively participate in the dealing of the Browns.  He kept hiring incompetent front office after another. (sound familiar?)  He finally sold the franchise to a guy that promised to be more pro-active.  The result is a team that is somehow even more pathetic than it was under Lerner.  We've set new historic lows in losing.  The new owner has meddled in affairs to the point where we ended up drafting an alcoholic that most of the coaches didn't want and then watched one of our better coaches quit because the owner insisted that we play him more.  We've gone through head-coaches and front offices even faster than Lerner did ... and oh yeah, the FBI is investigating the new owner and his original business for Fraud.  (The Browns facility was raided by the Feds last year)  So be careful what you wish for.