AstonMartin82 Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 If PA was genuinely interested in buying Villa and also genuinely interested in investing hundreds of millions to turn us into competitors again, then why wait for Lerner to go through the pain of stripping out the high earners. Having a massive negative PL wouldn't affect his willingness to purchase us if he is the guy to pump millions into us. Sorry, but I just don't see any dreams being built here. Isn't it obvious why? If you're selling a club then you get the books in order. Villa are a blank canvas at the moment. Perfect for a take over. The last thing a new owner would want is to come in and sort out a high earners mess regardless of their wealth. You don't get that rich by needlessly spunking money away. Having almost no big contracts to pay off is a lot more inviting than being left with a financial mess. Makes perfect sense to get the house in order. Then, isn't it obvious that if the "new" owner was waiting for the current owner to get his house in order then he isn't going to be the one spunking millions on us turning us into title contenders? If the "new" owner was waiting in the wings for a clear out then that tells me that we are going to have another Lerner in charge. Nothing spectacular, and nothing worth getting too exicted over. Don't get me wrong, I'd be glad Lerner is leaving but all this hype and excitment is very premature IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 (edited) If Lerner stays, Lambert stays....can't see any other scenario. We don't know in detail what his objective was, but by the sound of it, he has done it. and thats the way i see us going in to the new season. ps.. it not part of the script for us to be happy. Edited May 8, 2014 by TRO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mic09 Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 If PA was genuinely interested in buying Villa and also genuinely interested in investing hundreds of millions to turn us into competitors again, then why wait for Lerner to go through the pain of stripping out the high earners. Having a massive negative PL wouldn't affect his willingness to purchase us if he is the guy to pump millions into us. Sorry, but I just don't see any dreams being built here. Isn't it obvious why? If you're selling a club then you get the books in order. Villa are a blank canvas at the moment. Perfect for a take over. The last thing a new owner would want is to come in and sort out a high earners mess regardless of their wealth. You don't get that rich by needlessly spunking money away. Having almost no big contracts to pay off is a lot more inviting than being left with a financial mess. Makes perfect sense to get the house in order. Then, isn't it obvious that if the "new" owner was waiting for the current owner to get his house in order then he isn't going to be the one spunking millions on us turning us into title contenders? If the "new" owner was waiting in the wings for a clear out then that tells me that we are going to have another Lerner in charge. Nothing spectacular, and nothing worth getting too exicted over. Don't get me wrong, I'd be glad Lerner is leaving but all this hype and excitment is very premature IMO. Let me put it this way then; would you rather buy a mess or a well run club? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstonMartin82 Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 If PA was genuinely interested in buying Villa and also genuinely interested in investing hundreds of millions to turn us into competitors again, then why wait for Lerner to go through the pain of stripping out the high earners. Having a massive negative PL wouldn't affect his willingness to purchase us if he is the guy to pump millions into us. Sorry, but I just don't see any dreams being built here. Could be an FFP thing. The club is allowed to make X in losses per year under the English league FFP rules. For any losses over that, the club needs the owner to inject an equal amount to the amount of debt for the year above the threshold. Example: Villa owe run £50m in the black, but are only allowed to have losses of £10m. The options for the owner are to put in £40m of his own money to cover the loss, or to take the sanctions. That £40m is only used to service the debt, it can't be used for transfers, or increased wages. Lerner in doing his little £90m creation of shares has essentially done just that, one would assume to bring everything in line with FFP and have us avoiding sanctions. If we were £90m down for the last 2 seasons, for example, but breaking even this season (which we apparently are), then there's a £90m hole that needs to be filled for FFP or we face action after this season's books are out next year. So, in stripping out the high earners from the club over the last few years, Randy has (potentially) reduced the amount that a new owner would need to put into the club just to bring it up to par, without spending anything on transfer fees, to nil. Had he not injected that £90m or tried to offload big earners, a new owner could've been faced with spending that £90m (or more if we hadn't gotten rid of some of the players we did) just to avoid being docked points. Now, that owner could come in and spend that £90m on whatever he wants. I misunderstood the FFP rules in England the first few times around, but the way (I think) they work now is that your owner CAN put whatever he wants into the club, but it's only to service debt. That essentially makes things no different than they used to be. In the past it was: Owner injects £100m in equity to club. Club spends £100m on players. Now it's: Club spends £100m on players. Club books show club £100m in debt. Owner pays off £100m debt with equity injection. Same thing, different order. If you did it the old way, I believe it'd turn out as: Owner injects £100m in equity to club. Money not counted towards FFP because it's non football related. Club spends £100m on players. Club books show club £100m in debt. Owner has to put in ANOTHER £100m for FFP compliance This did cross my mind (not in as much detail though) and fair play... you could be spot on. But my gut feeling is telling me that is a long shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P3te Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 (edited) If PA was genuinely interested in buying Villa and also genuinely interested in investing hundreds of millions to turn us into competitors again, then why wait for Lerner to go through the pain of stripping out the high earners. Having a massive negative PL wouldn't affect his willingness to purchase us if he is the guy to pump millions into us. Sorry, but I just don't see any dreams being built here.Isn't it obvious why? If you're selling a club then you get the books in order. Villa are a blank canvas at the moment. Perfect for a take over. The last thing a new owner would want is to come in and sort out a high earners mess regardless of their wealth. You don't get that rich by needlessly spunking money away. Having almost no big contracts to pay off is a lot more inviting than being left with a financial mess. Makes perfect sense to get the house in order. Then, isn't it obvious that if the "new" owner was waiting for the current owner to get his house in order then he isn't going to be the one spunking millions on us turning us into title contenders? If the "new" owner was waiting in the wings for a clear out then that tells me that we are going to have another Lerner in charge. Nothing spectacular, and nothing worth getting too exicted over. Don't get me wrong, I'd be glad Lerner is leaving but all this hype and excitment is very premature IMO. See my post above. Randy doing the housecleaning means the new owner spends half as much to get the same. If you're spending 200m ba football club would you rather have to our in an extra 200m or just 100m to have the same result? Edited May 8, 2014 by P3te 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 If Lerner stays, Lambert stays....can't see any other scenario. We don't know in detail what his objective was, but by the sound of it, he has done it. and thats the way i see us going in to the new season. It can't be. Lambert wouldn't say he didn't know what's happening if he and Lerner were staying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villan_007 Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 If PA was genuinely interested in buying Villa and also genuinely interested in investing hundreds of millions to turn us into competitors again, then why wait for Lerner to go through the pain of stripping out the high earners. Having a massive negative PL wouldn't affect his willingness to purchase us if he is the guy to pump millions into us. Sorry, but I just don't see any dreams being built here. Isn't it obvious why? If you're selling a club then you get the books in order. Villa are a blank canvas at the moment. Perfect for a take over. The last thing a new owner would want is to come in and sort out a high earners mess regardless of their wealth. You don't get that rich by needlessly spunking money away. Having almost no big contracts to pay off is a lot more inviting than being left with a financial mess. Makes perfect sense to get the house in order. Then, isn't it obvious that if the "new" owner was waiting for the current owner to get his house in order then he isn't going to be the one spunking millions on us turning us into title contenders? If the "new" owner was waiting in the wings for a clear out then that tells me that we are going to have another Lerner in charge. Nothing spectacular, and nothing worth getting too exicted over. Don't get me wrong, I'd be glad Lerner is leaving but all this hype and excitment is very premature IMO. Why would a new owner want to pay off a number of contracts and then spend more money on new ones? They're businessman. It would decrease the value of the sale. Not sure why you don't see that, but horses for courses I guess. Just because these guys are loaded doesn't mean they throw money away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstonMartin82 Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 If PA was genuinely interested in buying Villa and also genuinely interested in investing hundreds of millions to turn us into competitors again, then why wait for Lerner to go through the pain of stripping out the high earners. Having a massive negative PL wouldn't affect his willingness to purchase us if he is the guy to pump millions into us. Sorry, but I just don't see any dreams being built here. Isn't it obvious why? If you're selling a club then you get the books in order. Villa are a blank canvas at the moment. Perfect for a take over. The last thing a new owner would want is to come in and sort out a high earners mess regardless of their wealth. You don't get that rich by needlessly spunking money away. Having almost no big contracts to pay off is a lot more inviting than being left with a financial mess. Makes perfect sense to get the house in order. Then, isn't it obvious that if the "new" owner was waiting for the current owner to get his house in order then he isn't going to be the one spunking millions on us turning us into title contenders? If the "new" owner was waiting in the wings for a clear out then that tells me that we are going to have another Lerner in charge. Nothing spectacular, and nothing worth getting too exicted over. Don't get me wrong, I'd be glad Lerner is leaving but all this hype and excitment is very premature IMO. Let me put it this way then; would you rather buy a mess or a well run club? I understand what you are saying, it isn't complicated, but if you were going to throw a load of money at it why would you care? Did the Sheiks care about the state of affairs at Man City when they got bought? Probably not. If you are interested in buying a well run club then you aren't interested in losing millions to turn us into challengers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstonMartin82 Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 P3te's response is the only reason why you would be willing to lose millions AND still buy a well run club. Here's hoping... (not holding my breath though!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrinityRoadSteps Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 A guy on Twitter says This belongs on the list that includes "The Mirror understands that...." Which is nearly as bad as "Talksport understands" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foreveryoung Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 There was a reason Randy put 90 million in the club. Remember he hasn't got random money to blow, he would hardly put 90 million in just to pay off debt. This could have been paid off long term there was no need to pay all in one, unless..........................????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeyAnty Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 (edited) If PA was genuinely interested in buying Villa and also genuinely interested in investing hundreds of millions to turn us into competitors again, then why wait for Lerner to go through the pain of stripping out the high earners. Having a massive negative PL wouldn't affect his willingness to purchase us if he is the guy to pump millions into us. Sorry, but I just don't see any dreams being built here. Could be an FFP thing. The club is allowed to make X in losses per year under the English league FFP rules. For any losses over that, the club needs the owner to inject an equal amount to the amount of debt for the year above the threshold. Example: Villa owe run £50m in the black, but are only allowed to have losses of £10m. The options for the owner are to put in £40m of his own money to cover the loss, or to take the sanctions. That £40m is only used to service the debt, it can't be used for transfers, or increased wages. Lerner in doing his little £90m creation of shares has essentially done just that, one would assume to bring everything in line with FFP and have us avoiding sanctions. If we were £90m down for the last 2 seasons, for example, but breaking even this season (which we apparently are), then there's a £90m hole that needs to be filled for FFP or we face action after this season's books are out next year. So, in stripping out the high earners from the club over the last few years, Randy has (potentially) reduced the amount that a new owner would need to put into the club just to bring it up to par, without spending anything on transfer fees, to nil. Had he not injected that £90m or tried to offload big earners, a new owner could've been faced with spending that £90m (or more if we hadn't gotten rid of some of the players we did) just to avoid being docked points. Now, that owner could come in and spend that £90m on whatever he wants. I misunderstood the FFP rules in England the first few times around, but the way (I think) they work now is that your owner CAN put whatever he wants into the club, but it's only to service debt. That essentially makes things no different than they used to be. In the past it was: Owner injects £100m in equity to club. Club spends £100m on players. Now it's: Club spends £100m on players. Club books show club £100m in debt. Owner pays off £100m debt with equity injection. Same thing, different order. If you did it the old way, I believe it'd turn out as: Owner injects £100m in equity to club. Money not counted towards FFP because it's non football related. Club spends £100m on players. Club books show club £100m in debt. Owner has to put in ANOTHER £100m for FFP compliance First time this 90 mill actually makes sense to me. Cheers pete Edited May 8, 2014 by HeyAnty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 If Lerner stays, Lambert stays....can't see any other scenario. We don't know in detail what his objective was, but by the sound of it, he has done it. and thats the way i see us going in to the new season. It can't be. Lambert wouldn't say he didn't know what's happening if he and Lerner were staying. hope you are right....we have had that many false dawns, just can't believe a little hope could be creeping back in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarewsEyebrowDesigner Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 I've said 'I don't know' many times when it wasn't the case, and I'm sure many people have done so too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstonMartin82 Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 (edited) If PA was genuinely interested in buying Villa and also genuinely interested in investing hundreds of millions to turn us into competitors again, then why wait for Lerner to go through the pain of stripping out the high earners. Having a massive negative PL wouldn't affect his willingness to purchase us if he is the guy to pump millions into us. Sorry, but I just don't see any dreams being built here. Isn't it obvious why? If you're selling a club then you get the books in order. Villa are a blank canvas at the moment. Perfect for a take over. The last thing a new owner would want is to come in and sort out a high earners mess regardless of their wealth. You don't get that rich by needlessly spunking money away. Having almost no big contracts to pay off is a lot more inviting than being left with a financial mess. Makes perfect sense to get the house in order. Then, isn't it obvious that if the "new" owner was waiting for the current owner to get his house in order then he isn't going to be the one spunking millions on us turning us into title contenders? If the "new" owner was waiting in the wings for a clear out then that tells me that we are going to have another Lerner in charge. Nothing spectacular, and nothing worth getting too exicted over. Don't get me wrong, I'd be glad Lerner is leaving but all this hype and excitment is very premature IMO. Why would a new owner want to pay off a number of contracts and then spend more money on new ones? They're businessman. It would decrease the value of the sale. Not sure why you don't see that, but horses for courses I guess. Just because these guys are loaded doesn't mean they throw money away. I see this perfectly well... I don't think you are understanding my point. A few people are getting excited by us being potentially bought out by a guy who has $11b in his bank. If this person was going to do something exceptional to us and turn us into title challengers he wouldn't be interested in getting value for money as he is going to be losing £100m's on the project anyway. If he is interested in getting value for money then he isn't going to be the one to turn us into title challengers and as such isn't worth getting so excited about... unless of course P3te's excellently written post and point above comes into play. Edited May 8, 2014 by AstonMartin82 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suttonpaul Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 A guy on Twitter says his mate works for Villa in the admin department and that there have been meetings with Oracle reps this month. F knows Simple, new computer software in the admin department. Nah they aren't having anything new I just checked Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
useless Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 Looks like Randy is morphing into Lambert. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa-revolution Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 I've said 'I don't know' many times when it wasn't the case, and I'm sure many people have done so too. " I don't know." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suttonpaul Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 If PA was genuinely interested in buying Villa and also genuinely interested in investing hundreds of millions to turn us into competitors again, then why wait for Lerner to go through the pain of stripping out the high earners. Having a massive negative PL wouldn't affect his willingness to purchase us if he is the guy to pump millions into us. Sorry, but I just don't see any dreams being built here. Could be an FFP thing. The club is allowed to make X in losses per year under the English league FFP rules. For any losses over that, the club needs the owner to inject an equal amount to the amount of debt for the year above the threshold. Example: Villa owe run £50m in the black, but are only allowed to have losses of £10m. The options for the owner are to put in £40m of his own money to cover the loss, or to take the sanctions. That £40m is only used to service the debt, it can't be used for transfers, or increased wages. Lerner in doing his little £90m creation of shares has essentially done just that, one would assume to bring everything in line with FFP and have us avoiding sanctions. If we were £90m down for the last 2 seasons, for example, but breaking even this season (which we apparently are), then there's a £90m hole that needs to be filled for FFP or we face action after this season's books are out next year. So, in stripping out the high earners from the club over the last few years, Randy has (potentially) reduced the amount that a new owner would need to put into the club just to bring it up to par, without spending anything on transfer fees, to nil. Had he not injected that £90m or tried to offload big earners, a new owner could've been faced with spending that £90m (or more if we hadn't gotten rid of some of the players we did) just to avoid being docked points. Now, that owner could come in and spend that £90m on whatever he wants. I misunderstood the FFP rules in England the first few times around, but the way (I think) they work now is that your owner CAN put whatever he wants into the club, but it's only to service debt. That essentially makes things no different than they used to be. In the past it was: Owner injects £100m in equity to club. Club spends £100m on players. Now it's: Club spends £100m on players. Club books show club £100m in debt. Owner pays off £100m debt with equity injection. Same thing, different order. If you did it the old way, I believe it'd turn out as: Owner injects £100m in equity to club. Money not counted towards FFP because it's non football related. Club spends £100m on players. Club books show club £100m in debt. Owner has to put in ANOTHER £100m for FFP compliance That isn't how it works Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suttonpaul Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 Looks like Randy is morphing into Lambert. He looks like a young chubby brown 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts