StanBalaban Posted June 7, 2014 Share Posted June 7, 2014 Yeah, the whole thing was a vanity project for Lerner. He was in over his head from Day One. Disagree - Lerner doesn't seem to be a vain individual whatsoever (evidenced by the fact that he doesn't like the limelight at all) and I think he bought the club because he was genuinely interested in it at the time. But going from genuine interest to not showing up to watch a match in person for months on end suggest that maybe the thing WAS a vanity pursuit. Once things got tough, he couldn't be bothered. I'd liken it to the equivalent of one of us buying a classic car. Such high hopes when you first buy it. You're happy pumping money into getting it into concourse condition. After a while, the constant drain on your bank account becomes a strain though. The novelty has worn off and it's no-longer an item of pleasure, especially when you've seen better examples out on your weekend drive. Eventually it becomes neglected. You don't wash it and you rarely drive it. Come the summer, it's going in the Autotrader, hoping that someone else can take it off your hands. "£200,000,000 o.n.o - no time wasters please.". 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amo69 Posted June 7, 2014 Share Posted June 7, 2014 You know the fear that fans have about a rich owner losing interest and it destroying the club. That is what has happened to us to some extent. The only difference is our Billionaire owner wants to make his money back and we have some how managed to stay in the league so the damage hasn't been as great as it could have been. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamesbuchanan Posted June 7, 2014 Share Posted June 7, 2014 Yeah, the whole thing was a vanity project for Lerner. He was in over his head from Day One. Disagree - Lerner doesn't seem to be a vain individual whatsoever (evidenced by the fact that he doesn't like the limelight at all) and I think he bought the club because he was genuinely interested in it at the time. But going from genuine interest to not showing up to watch a match in person for months on end suggest that maybe the thing WAS a vanity pursuit. Once things got tough, he couldn't be bothered. I assumed that people knew that the reason he wasn't attending games was due to his divorce settlement and the requirement to spend more time in the US with his kids? Nobody seems to ever mention it when they accuse him of staying away from games because he's lost interest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morkery Posted June 7, 2014 Share Posted June 7, 2014 :blink: ridiculous which part. He clearly lost interest. Why do you think O'Neill left? If you believe that he left because he's a arrogant child - I think you have fallen for one of the biggest bullshit smokescreens our owner has given. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dodgyknees Posted June 7, 2014 Share Posted June 7, 2014 Just get out of our club, we were better off with Doug. Doug was at a point where he had to go but his last year was better than the last 3 we've had under Lerner. Each are bad but for different reasons. At least Lerner has looked after the heritage and history which keeps him light years ahead of Doug. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amo69 Posted June 7, 2014 Share Posted June 7, 2014 Just get out of our club, we were better off with Doug. Doug was at a point where he had to go but his last year was better than the last 3 we've had under Lerner. Doug was no billionaire yet he managed to run the club better than it is now. I'm not saying it wasn't becoming dark times under Doug but still what's all that about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted June 7, 2014 Share Posted June 7, 2014 Just get out of our club, we were better off with Doug. Doug was at a point where he had to go but his last year was better than the last 3 we've had under Lerner. Each are bad but for different reasons. At least Lerner has looked after the heritage and history which keeps him light years ahead of Doug. TBH I buy a season ticket to watch the team and how they perform and the results they get is the main concern for me. My time watching villa under Doug was more enjoyable than watching villa under Lerner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted June 7, 2014 Share Posted June 7, 2014 Just get out of our club, we were better off with Doug.Doug was at a point where he had to go but his last year was better than the last 3 we've had under Lerner. Doug was no billionaire yet he managed to run the club better than it is now. I'm not saying it wasn't becoming dark times under Doug but still what's all that about? It amazed me that some were excited and praised Lerner not long back when they hoped we'd become the team we managed to be under Doug. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samjp26 Posted June 7, 2014 Share Posted June 7, 2014 Doug wouldn't stand a chance in the modern game to be fair. Football has moved on very quickly in terms of finances and such, completely different to what it was even when Randy had first bought us. I think the only way we'd be able to compete or be successful without a rich owner is if we got relegated and had time to rebuild from the ground up, outside of the Premier League. I still think it is incredible that we haven't gone down in these last 4 seasons. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amo69 Posted June 7, 2014 Share Posted June 7, 2014 Doug wouldn't stand a chance in the modern game to be fair. Football has moved on very quickly in terms of finances and such, completely different to what it was even when Randy had first bought us. I think the only way we'd be able to compete or be successful without a rich owner is if we got relegated and had time to rebuild from the ground up, outside of the Premier League. I still think it is incredible that we haven't gone down in these last 4 seasons. He wouldn't but considering Doug has know where near the resources Lerner has yet we were in a better state under him surely shows how bad a job Lerner has done. It's not all about having billionaire owners. The way our club has been run is a joke and the only reason we have really crashed and burned is we escaped relegation by the skin of our teeth 3 seasons in a row. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smetrov Posted June 7, 2014 Share Posted June 7, 2014 Yeah, the whole thing was a vanity project for Lerner. He was in over his head from Day One. Disagree - Lerner doesn't seem to be a vain individual whatsoever (evidenced by the fact that he doesn't like the limelight at all) and I think he bought the club because he was genuinely interested in it at the time. But going from genuine interest to not showing up to watch a match in person for months on end suggest that maybe the thing WAS a vanity pursuit. Once things got tough, he couldn't be bothered. I assumed that people knew that the reason he wasn't attending games was due to his divorce settlement and the requirement to spend more time in the US with his kids? Nobody seems to ever mention it when they accuse him of staying away from games because he's lost interest. what requirement is that then ? granted it might make him a less frequent visitor - but zero attendances in 18 months...come on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AValon Posted June 7, 2014 Share Posted June 7, 2014 Doug was a dinosaur.....and we know what happened to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoelVilla Posted June 7, 2014 Share Posted June 7, 2014 This thread has many aliases. Now its the Randy Lerner thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliffy Biro Posted June 7, 2014 Share Posted June 7, 2014 Why is it because newcastle may not be able to sell means were the same? nobody would sell a business that has revenue well over 75m for 75m, were worth double that as are a lot of similar clubs in the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamesbuchanan Posted June 7, 2014 Share Posted June 7, 2014 Yeah, the whole thing was a vanity project for Lerner. He was in over his head from Day One. Disagree - Lerner doesn't seem to be a vain individual whatsoever (evidenced by the fact that he doesn't like the limelight at all) and I think he bought the club because he was genuinely interested in it at the time. But going from genuine interest to not showing up to watch a match in person for months on end suggest that maybe the thing WAS a vanity pursuit. Once things got tough, he couldn't be bothered. I assumed that people knew that the reason he wasn't attending games was due to his divorce settlement and the requirement to spend more time in the US with his kids? Nobody seems to ever mention it when they accuse him of staying away from games because he's lost interest. what requirement is that then ? granted it might make him a less frequent visitor - but zero attendances in 18 months...come on Maybe it's zero attendances, maybe it's not - there have been suggestions that he's been here 'undercover'. Anyway, he has to spend at least 6 months every year in Ohio due to the terms of his divorce settlement. 3 of his 4 kids are living with his ex-wife in NYC while he has custody of the fourth. He spends most of the week in Cleveland with the fourth kid, and then goes to NYC to see his other kids at the weekend. Google it, it was mentioned in a few places in the media about 18 months ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AValon Posted June 7, 2014 Share Posted June 7, 2014 Well, back on topic, it looks like its either going to be an American or Middle Eastern takeover. Inflated ego against inflated personal wealth? Whichever way it goes, its gonna be a bumpy ride.I Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amo69 Posted June 7, 2014 Share Posted June 7, 2014 Well, back on topic, it looks like its either going to be an American or Middle Eastern takeover. Inflated ego against inflated personal wealth? Whichever way it goes, its gonna be a bumpy ride.I Does it? Looks more like it's going to be no takeover to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted June 7, 2014 Share Posted June 7, 2014 Doug wouldn't stand a chance in the modern game to be fair. Football has moved on very quickly in terms of finances and such, completely different to what it was even when Randy had first bought us. I think the only way we'd be able to compete or be successful without a rich owner is if we got relegated and had time to rebuild from the ground up, outside of the Premier League. I still think it is incredible that we haven't gone down in these last 4 seasons. Lerner doesn't stand a chance in the modern game. Like I said earlier the last 3 years have been worse than when Doug was old, ill and on his way out. Everton seem to find a way, spurs have not spent city/Chelsea levels of money and they're up there. Newcastle have had moments recently as well. I think its just excuse making for Lerner stating that there's no way. Lets not also forger that he's certainly made it harder for us by allowing more teams to financially over take us and by putting us in this current mess. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smetrov Posted June 7, 2014 Share Posted June 7, 2014 Yeah, the whole thing was a vanity project for Lerner. He was in over his head from Day One. Disagree - Lerner doesn't seem to be a vain individual whatsoever (evidenced by the fact that he doesn't like the limelight at all) and I think he bought the club because he was genuinely interested in it at the time.But going from genuine interest to not showing up to watch a match in person for months on end suggest that maybe the thing WAS a vanity pursuit. Once things got tough, he couldn't be bothered. I assumed that people knew that the reason he wasn't attending games was due to his divorce settlement and the requirement to spend more time in the US with his kids? Nobody seems to ever mention it when they accuse him of staying away from games because he's lost interest.what requirement is that then ?granted it might make him a less frequent visitor - but zero attendances in 18 months...come onMaybe it's zero attendances, maybe it's not - there have been suggestions that he's been here 'undercover'. Anyway, he has to spend at least 6 months every year in Ohio due to the terms of his divorce settlement. 3 of his 4 kids are living with his ex-wife in NYC while he has custody of the fourth. He spends most of the week in Cleveland with the fourth kid, and then goes to NYC to see his other kids at the weekend. Google it, it was mentioned in a few places in the media about 18 months ago. so for some one who has committed no crime and could possibly afford the best lawyers - he is subject to restriction of movement limiting him to Ohio for 6 months - not buying that myself Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amo69 Posted June 7, 2014 Share Posted June 7, 2014 Yeah, the whole thing was a vanity project for Lerner. He was in over his head from Day One. Disagree - Lerner doesn't seem to be a vain individual whatsoever (evidenced by the fact that he doesn't like the limelight at all) and I think he bought the club because he was genuinely interested in it at the time.But going from genuine interest to not showing up to watch a match in person for months on end suggest that maybe the thing WAS a vanity pursuit. Once things got tough, he couldn't be bothered. I assumed that people knew that the reason he wasn't attending games was due to his divorce settlement and the requirement to spend more time in the US with his kids? Nobody seems to ever mention it when they accuse him of staying away from games because he's lost interest.what requirement is that then ?granted it might make him a less frequent visitor - but zero attendances in 18 months...come onMaybe it's zero attendances, maybe it's not - there have been suggestions that he's been here 'undercover'. Anyway, he has to spend at least 6 months every year in Ohio due to the terms of his divorce settlement. 3 of his 4 kids are living with his ex-wife in NYC while he has custody of the fourth. He spends most of the week in Cleveland with the fourth kid, and then goes to NYC to see his other kids at the weekend. Google it, it was mentioned in a few places in the media about 18 months ago. so for some one who has committed no crime and could possibly afford the best lawyers - he is subject to restriction of movement limiting him to Ohio for 6 months - not buying that myself Or he just doesn't give a shit! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts