The Randy Lerner thread

[blandy]

Of course Pete but a lot of it came from General Krulak's posts "we WILL get there" and all that (and I like the general positing on the numerous sites).

Indeed, Don't believe the hype, was Public Enemy's sound advice.

 

is another.

[Hev]

I too just feel so disappointed by Randy's now seemingly total lack of interest.      Say what you like about Doug but he does still attend the games - and the number of times we have seen him on the Motorway in his AV1 going to away games is numerous (albeit chauffeur driven) - but at least he still seems bothered.   Don't mistake me for a Doug supporter but I just don't see how Randy has improved us at all - initially yes, I too got carried away with all the hype but how deflated do I feel now.   Randy just doesn't seem bothered anymore.

[VillaChris]

I never expected from the Randy years an all conquering domination of the premier league or anything like that as in the back of my mind I thought it wouldn't be too long before we were back at our natural level of 6th or 7th.

 

What I did hope was maybe a bit of excitement like Newcastle and Leeds had in the early millennium, both had great runs in the champions league and had the feel of clubs going places, proper European nights at VP for a season or two wasn't impossible surely.

 

I know it came crashing down for both clubs, particularly Leeds but it's happened to us on a smaller scale, getting very close to being relegated while cost cutting. Luckily we didn't crash and have the ultimate low under him but we didn't have the ultimate high under Lerner either and I think that's how it will stay for however much longer he Is our owner.

[TRO]

Most of the clubs that are run by well intentioned owners/chairmen as opposed to filthy rich billionaires with money to burn....usually rely on managers ability in the transfer market to make the difference.

Call me old fashioned.....but it seems to me that teams like Everton, WBA,Southampton,Swansea, Stoke who are all less financially proud than us....seem to have little fear of us in transfer market.

They appear to sign players for modest sums that we could well make use of.

I see the price of Bent exceeding the combined cost of Cabaye, Ben hafa and sissoko...if you get my drift, so I do wonder about our value for money.

I support Lambert and right now would't wish for anyone else....but I am so getting impatient for a bit of creativity in the offensive positions.

Edited November 12, 2013 by TRO

[Rovers13]

Most of the clubs that are run by well intentioned owners/chairmen as opposed to filthy rich billionaires with money to burn....usually rely on managers ability in the transfer market to make the difference.

Call me old fashioned.....but it seems to me that teams like Everton, WBA,Southampton,Swansea, Stoke who are all less financially proud than us....seem to have little fear of us in transfer market.

They appear to sign players for modest sums that we could well make us of.

I see the price of Bent exceeding the combined cost of Cabaye, Ben hafa and sissoko...if you get my drift, so I do wonder about our value for money.

I support Lambert and right now would't wish for anyone else....but I am so getting impatient for a bit of creativity in the offensive positions.

Southampton, Everton, Stoke have all spent a good deal more than Villa on players and wages recently

[TRO]

 

Most of the clubs that are run by well intentioned owners/chairmen as opposed to filthy rich billionaires with money to burn....usually rely on managers ability in the transfer market to make the difference.

Call me old fashioned.....but it seems to me that teams like Everton, WBA,Southampton,Swansea, Stoke who are all less financially proud than us....seem to have little fear of us in transfer market.

They appear to sign players for modest sums that we could well make us of.

I see the price of Bent exceeding the combined cost of Cabaye, Ben hafa and sissoko...if you get my drift, so I do wonder about our value for money.

I support Lambert and right now would't wish for anyone else....but I am so getting impatient for a bit of creativity in the offensive positions.

Southampton, Everton, Stoke have all spent a good deal more than Villa on players and wages recently

 

 

 

i was talking in a general sense rather than specific window, but hey...how do they do it. I guess they are not on an austerity programme like us trying to clear up the past, but you can't say they are bigger clubs than us.

 

look we too have made some decent buys too, but it seems we buy or better put have bought more misses than hits than most....bit on the lines of Sunderland, but not quite as bad.

 

some of the players we come up against who give us a hard time are/ or have been within our budgets....i.e Cabaye,Ben Harfa, there are a plethora of players like that in the teams outside the top six that would do us proud.

 

I'm just saying its not all about money, its also about talent spotting.

Edited October 8, 2013 by TRO

[P3te]

Cabaye would have been a villa player had houllier stayed apparently

[suttonpaul]

I hate myself for writing this .... If I were in charge of Villa and was going to run a break even club.......

 

I would spend less on transfer fees and wages by buying players like we have recently and instead of progressing by selling the high value players after a few years and buying players of a higher price tag than before ala what Spurs have done recently I would do something radically different.

 

I would get a lot more scouts of proven ability all over the world looking for very young players of say 10 to 21 years old (the older end of the scale would be players we have spotted for the first team and we want to nick them for our club on the cheap)  and build a much larger academy than we currently have whilst also building a large private school.

 

The reason for it is the following.......

 

We could sell the opportunity to prospective youth players (and parents) both domestic and internationally as come to Villa we think your kid has potential and in return we will give him the best training facilities but also a top class private education in a boarding school.

 

It makes it a no brainer for those parents as if the child fails to be a player he will have the education to go on and succeed else where and we can suck up the talent of the other players who do make it because they didn't want to take the risk of quitting education early.

 

Further to that once this had become a success I would extend that opportunity for those families to move to the school/training complex by building an estate of houses but this would be 20 years down the line once this system had become very successful and paid for itself so that it knocks down the barrier separating parents from their children.

 

Having the children at boarding school will allow the club to control everything from morals, diet, to what they read etc so that we can not only turn out skilful players who are more likely to be loyal but also people who are disciplined and well educated.

 

 

Time to shoot me down as I know it is a radical idea but it is what I believe there is a big space for in football.

[VillaChris]

Most of the clubs that are run by well intentioned owners/chairmen as opposed to filthy rich billionaires with money to burn....usually rely on managers ability in the transfer market to make the difference.

Call me old fashioned.....but it seems to me that teams like Everton, WBA,Southampton,Swansea, Stoke who are all less financially proud than us....seem to have little fear of us in transfer market.

They appear to sign players for modest sums that we could well make us of.

I see the price of Bent exceeding the combined cost of Cabaye, Ben hafa and sissoko...if you get my drift, so I do wonder about our value for money.

I support Lambert and right now would't wish for anyone else....but I am so getting impatient for a bit of creativity in the offensive positions.

 

Lambert's signings on the whole have been good value, signing a world class forward for 7m was a good spot anyway and I think most his others have been good value even if a few are currently having a dip in form.

 

He's the last villa manager who should be questioned over his signings that Lerner has appointed imo although hopefully a creative midfielder will be signed sooner or later.

[terrytini]

 

 

Most of the clubs that are run by well intentioned owners/chairmen as opposed to filthy rich billionaires with money to burn....usually rely on managers ability in the transfer market to make the difference.

Call me old fashioned.....but it seems to me that teams like Everton, WBA,Southampton,Swansea, Stoke who are all less financially proud than us....seem to have little fear of us in transfer market.

They appear to sign players for modest sums that we could well make us of.

I see the price of Bent exceeding the combined cost of Cabaye, Ben hafa and sissoko...if you get my drift, so I do wonder about our value for money.

I support Lambert and right now would't wish for anyone else....but I am so getting impatient for a bit of creativity in the offensive positions.

Southampton, Everton, Stoke have all spent a good deal more than Villa on players and wages recently

 

 

 

i was talking in a general sense rather than specific window, but hey...how do they do it. I guess they are not on an austerity programme like us trying to clear up the past, but you can't say they are bigger clubs than us.

 

look we too have made some decent buys too, but it seems we buy or better put have bought more misses than hits than most....bit on the lines of Sunderland, but not quite as bad.

 

some of the players we come up against who give us a hard time are/ or have been within our budgets....i.e Cabaye,Ben Harfa, there are a plethora of players like that in the teams outside the top six that would do us proud.

 

I'm just saying its not all about money, its also about talent spotting.

 

 

Well I was a big fan of MON but I have to admit the most likely reason the Clubs you mention currently appear a bit beter off than us is in my view simply, as part of your reply suggests at, is that we overspent  - and were a poor club in respect of spotting talent - from about the end time of Gregory, particularly underDOL and MON,  until now under PL.

 

A couple more years of PL and we will be the right way round again - most of his buys  - IMO - have a good chance of either costing little in wages or turning in a profit later.

 

Our transfer policy and our Home form are both largely attributable, in my view, to a 10 year or so general decline which MON's years of relative success masked over (to some it didn't even do that !) but did nothing to stop.  I am confident PL is in thwe process of reversing this brilliantly.

[villan_007]

Two of my mates went on the Villa tour last week to checkout the new tunnel. If anyone has been before you'll remember there's a point where you get taken to the big painting of Villa Park that Randy brought, the guide goes on to tell you about Randy's love for art.

 

So as they were walking off my mates were chatting to the guide about the painting, when he told them Randy loves art that much, he has just donated £10 million to a certain, museum / gallery.  My mates stood there stunned and said why wasn't that put into the squad? the guide kind of laughed it off and changed the subject.

 

Now I realise there maybe certain things in place for this donation to happen, through his family or other business, but it just kind of really annoyed me. Lambert isn't given a lot to play with but Randy is chucking 10mill (Our AM??) into art!!

[Panto_Villan]

So as they were walking off my mates were chatting to the guide about the painting, when he told them Randy loves art that much, he has just donated £10 million to a certain, museum / gallery.  My mates stood there stunned and said why wasn't that put into the squad? the guide kind of laughed it off and changed the subject.

 

Now I realise there maybe certain things in place for this donation to happen, through his family or other business, but it just kind of really annoyed me. Lambert isn't given a lot to play with but Randy is chucking 10mill (Our AM??) into art!!

 

Again, I find some of the criticism of Lerner outright ridiculous. He owns the club, not the other way around. He is allowed to have other interests and spend money on things other than Villa.

 

The man is worth hundreds of millions of dollars and you have no evidence that the art donation reduced the amount of funding available to Villa...if he was worth $10m and he gave $10m to charity I could see your point, maybe. Or if he'd insisted Villa give $10m of their transfer budget to an art gallery. But it's a pretty pathetic viewpoint to think Randy giving a donation to charity makes him a bad person.

[villan_007]

Where did I say it made him a bad person? If you read my post I said there is probably other factors in place regarding the donation. I was just sharing a story, and the fact we are struggling to raise any kind of half decent transfer budget thought it warranted a discussion that he has other funds at his disposal. The only pathetic thing is your inability to have a constructive discussion without dishing out insults.

[Panto_Villan]

OK, I'll spell it out for you. You're annoyed that Lerner gave $10m to charity, sufficiently so that when you and your mates were told the story you were all "stunned" and demanded to know why it wasn't given to the club instead?  You shared a story that contained the implication he shouldn't be giving any money to anything else except Villa. Otherwise why didn't you just shrug your shoulders and say "I don't care what Randy's other interests and donations are, I only care about him in the context of Aston Villa"?

 

You're obviously raising the story as a criticism of him, not praising him for his generosity...which seems perverse given it is a charitable donation, rather than keeping the money for himself. We all know he has plenty of funds at his disposal - the man is worth $1bn. The issue has never been that Randy couldn't afford to put £100m into the club, it's that he obviously currently does not have the desire to do so. A $10m donation doesn't affect that in any way. It's 1% of his personal wealth, less if you include the tax breaks.

 

He gives money to charity - it's not a valid stick to beat him with.

Edited November 10, 2013 by Panto_Villan

[smetrov]

 

 

So as they were walking off my mates were chatting to the guide about the painting, when he told them Randy loves art that much, he has just donated £10 million to a certain, museum / gallery.  My mates stood there stunned and said why wasn't that put into the squad? the guide kind of laughed it off and changed the subject.

 

Now I realise there maybe certain things in place for this donation to happen, through his family or other business, but it just kind of really annoyed me. Lambert isn't given a lot to play with but Randy is chucking 10mill (Our AM??) into art!!

 

Again, I find some of the criticism of Lerner outright ridiculous. He owns the club, not the other way around. He is allowed to have other interests and spend money on things other than Villa.

 

The man is worth hundreds of millions of dollars and you have no evidence that the art donation reduced the amount of funding available to Villa...if he was worth $10m and he gave $10m to charity I could see your point, maybe. Or if he'd insisted Villa give $10m of their transfer budget to an art gallery. But it's a pretty pathetic viewpoint to think Randy giving a donation to charity makes him a bad person.

Where did I say it made him a bad person? If you read my post I said there is probably other factors in place regarding the donation. I was just sharing a story, and the fact we are struggling to raise any kind of half decent transfer budget thought it warranted a discussion that he has other funds at his disposal. The only pathetic thing is your inability to have a constructive discussion without dishing out insults.

 

 

I actually think of more significance is the tale of Randy restoring an old mansion - spending millions in the process - then got bored and the mansion just lapped back into its former state. Heavy parallels with his villa tenure there..... 

[TRO]

Two of my mates went on the Villa tour last week to checkout the new tunnel. If anyone has been before you'll remember there's a point where you get taken to the big painting of Villa Park that Randy brought, the guide goes on to tell you about Randy's love for art.

 

So as they were walking off my mates were chatting to the guide about the painting, when he told them Randy loves art that much, he has just donated £10 million to a certain, museum / gallery.  My mates stood there stunned and said why wasn't that put into the squad? the guide kind of laughed it off and changed the subject.

 

Now I realise there maybe certain things in place for this donation to happen, through his family or other business, but it just kind of really annoyed me. Lambert isn't given a lot to play with but Randy is chucking 10mill (Our AM??) into art!!

He did it ....he bought Curtis Davies.

[TRO]

I think his episode with Martin O'Neill and the subsequent debacle of the McLeish appointment soured our leaders interest.

I would have hoped Paul Lamberts signing of Christian Beneteke may have restored a bit of Faith, but perhaps Bent has negated that.

....just second guessing.

has he still got the tattoo? or has it been blended in to an image of the Tate Gallery.

Edited November 12, 2013 by TRO

[CrackpotForeigner]

has he still got the tattoo? or has it been blended in to the Tate Gallery.

 

The tattoo was a warning sign, really. His ANKLE?

 

It's forearm/shoulder/chest/forehead if you're serious about this, Randy

[praisedmambo]

http://www.astonvillalife.com/aston-villa-blog/so-this-is-what-is-actually-happening-behind-the-scenes/?

 

 

So This Is What Is Actually Happening Behind The Scenes

Posted Nov 13 2013 by Matt Turvey with 24 Comments

 

A few weeks ago, there was an informal meeting between Robin Russell (CFO), Paul Faulkner (CEO), and members of the AVST (Aston Villa Supporters Trust) as part of the club’s AGM. Given that we have a little time to cover other topics due to the international break, I wanted to cover what I feel is a key area of interest.

Because the meeting was only one discussing topics on an informal basis, and because financially sensitive information that was not deemed suitable for public divulgence, it was not fully minuted. However, information was provided on the core of what was discussed, and those overviews are listed below (in bold), along with my own comments on each section (in italics).

“Competing Against The Likes of ‘Spurs’”

The Club: Back in 2010, Club was 6th in league, cup runs. MON exit 4 days before the start of the season was a major blow to plans. We are now rebuilding and on a journey. Strategy is based on continuity of management. The club are looking to build success from continuity like ManU/Arsenal model. They are looking to try and build in continuity that can be maintained even if the manager changes, an ethos that runs through. Objective will be to keep improving but to do it in a steady, sustainable way. Lessons have been learnt from the change in management.

In terms of timescales for success, Paul (Faulkner) referred to the unpredictability of football – MON exit, whereas Spurs picking up a world record fee for Gareth Bale is the kind of thing that can suddenly bring success much closer. Football is an unpredictable game – so saying ‘Champions League in 5 years’ is pointless, it could be later, it could be sooner.

AVL: Like many other fans, I’m disappointed we have gone from a club competing at the top, to a club existing at the wrong end of the table in the space of the last few seasons. However, as discussed many times on this site, I understand why this has been the case.

Firstly, Martin O’Neill left the club in a situation that left the wages dangerously high. Between the then-coming institution of Financial Fair Play, and a general need for the business to operate in a sensible manner, cuts were assumed and expected.

Therefore the current situation isn’t so much a surprise as a readjustment. Yes, this has created a lot of frustration amongst our own fans – nobody likes to go backwards in life or football – but it is the result of the unpredictable nature of football, and MON leaving was a challenging situation, not only in terms of his financial legacy, but of the timing of his exit so close to the start of that particular season.

I also understand the frustration that Randy Lerner could have been on top of the financial situation faster. As we are all aware, MON can be a very charming man and, given his role in the game is that of a professional football manager, it made sense for Lerner to give his manager time and space to move forwards.

In that sense, it wasn’t so much a case of the chairman having no idea of what was going on, but rather of his desire to give a footballing man a chance to illustrate how he could effectively push the club forwards. Sadly, as a result of decreased progress when investment was sustained at a high level (then second only to Manchester City in net-spend terms), eventually the progress under MON had to be challenged by the club.

The Club’s Player Acquisition Strategy

The Club: Lambert has had £43 million to spend over the last 2 seasons and it is up to him how he spends it. He could spend that on 2 players or 15. It is important to maintain a sustainable wage structure though. We don’t sell players just because so called ‘big clubs’ want them. We sell players at a time and price that is right for Aston Villa. This is evidenced by Barry with Liverpool & Benteke last summer. Lambert speaks to Randy Lerner daily and has an excellent relationship with him.

It was Lambert who personally persuaded him that Aston Villa is the place for Benteke. Villa are still working on the basis of him staying on a long term basis due to his excellent relationship with Lambert. If we do sell him, he will only go to a team meeting our valuation, and there is no reason for that money not to be available for a replacement. Paul said it wouldn’t make any sense to sell a key player and then not replace him. It’s important not to confuse ‘not spending money’ with ‘spending money and it not working out’ which may have happened in the past. It’s not hard to persuade players to come to Aston Villa – we are an impressive club with a fantastic infrastructure in terms of stadium & training facilities. Lambert is able to build on this.

AVL: The figures spent on transfers by our current manager are (mostly) in the public domain. As stated previously on AVL, the chairman leaves decisions on who should be bought and why to the footballing personnel at the club. We also know that Gary Karsa now occupies a role that has been newly created since his employment.

Above, the club details that the money provided to Lambert is, like the money spent previously on the likes of Darren Bent, to be used at the manager’s discretion.

However, we also know enough about the past three seasons that wages have made a significant restriction on how the manager can spend money. Yes, Lambert can spend the money given to him over the past few seasons (£43m being a gross figure, not net), but there are certain undeniable correlations in the football market that denies him from spending money in a certain way (at present).

For example, the postulation that Lambert can spend the £43m on a smaller number of players (such as 2) may well be perceived as a choice but, upon closer analysis, it is only Hobson’s choice.

Why? Villa could, in theory, spend £43m on two players. However, assuming the full spend was made on those two players, there would be two major issues.

First, the wages of a £20m+ player would likely be high, and thus mean there would be a massive level of expectation on said signing(s).

Secondly, the squad has been majorly lacking in depth. Had two players been bought – a topic discussed by me a while back – we would have been even more susceptible to injury than we are now. Given this, Lambert is doing the right thing by padding the team out with “better value” players in the short term – to do anything otherwise would be bordering on negligent. Therefore I wholly understand and support the decisions made by the manager under the current restrictions, even if they are not made as apparent as simple mathematics make them appear.

UEFA Financial Fair Play/Financial Sustainability

The Club: With the increased income from Premier League TV rights, and the decrease in total player remuneration being addressed, the books are now balanced and in surplus subject to league position. We’re FFP compliant. Robin (Russell) also added that the yield (income as a ratio to attendance) has also been increasing.

AVL: We knew that this was the plan and, given the financial changes made, it is good that Villa are back to a balanced position.

It is important, however, to know that this doesn’t mean we will start significant investment straight away. Yes, there will be increased financial revenue from sustaining a position in the Premier League but this is given to the club per season, based on a) not being relegated and our overall placement in the league.

Logically, what would make sense would be to accrue an amount of money based on accruing money according to a primary objective – ensuring we are safe each year. Once this is established, and in keeping with FFP rules, it would then allows us to target an increased level of quality of player, but with the benefit of financial stability.

As above, this means that Lambert is starting off with a restricted ability to spend given wages outlay and a need to pad the team. Given that restriction, the three choices are a) young players who have not yet got to a high wage earning level, older players who have not progressed (i.e. previous failures at other clubs), or c) ignoring the depth issue and focusing on less players with more individual wages. The latter option is not truly viable given it would both create rifts based on wage disparity – an issue affecting the club previously – and the fact that injuries have proven how fragile our augmented squad still is. Had we spent money on less players, we would be down to playing the U19s out of necessity, not choice.

Again, this evolution process can feel slow, and may also be frustrating for fans, but it is infinitely preferable compared to the boom-and-bust cycle we experienced post-MON – anyone who wants to go back to such a plan must observe the ramifications of what it caused, and how upset that has made fans. Do we really want that again? One could argue strongly that they don’t – if they did, wouldn’t we be happy now based on simple cause-and-effect, given that we are where we are as a result of those choices?

North Stand Redevelopment

The Club: The plans have been updated but the priority now is to use resources to build a team that would fill the existing stadium.

AVL: Understandable – spending money on a capital investment when the club is lacking the ability to sell out current capacity would be foolish, and would restrict an already challenging budget.

You can read the original summary (including other topics not discussed in this article) from the following link on the AVST website (information regarding the above items is included in Appendix 1) –http://www.villatrust.org.uk/?p=506

[Big_John_10]

As we are all aware, MON can be a very charming man

That's the excuse for failing to control the finances at the club? The issue was wages to ratio so the owner ignored all the information given to him because the manager was charming?

There's also no mention of the massive over spending on wages that continued for two years after MON and no mention of the £16 million paid in compensation due to poor managerial appointments.

It was an interesting article and it does sound very positive for the future, although it seems to be a slow process.

My only issue though is how much I buy into the idea Lerner actually will at some point invest in a sensible manner to try and be more successful.

His actions during last January and the January before speak volumes as to his long term view of this club. I can't believe that an owner with a long term plan for success was happy to risk it all by not backing his manager when we desperately needed it. That doesn't make sense to me.