Steven Hollis

[Harry]

I'm not really getting all the negativity particularly as most posters would have never heard of him before his appointment. I know of him as I worked at KPMG in the 1980's although I never knew him personally but to end up as senior partner of their Midlands practice he must have something. He will have come in in a non-executive role so he will not be involved in the day to day running of the club. As he is a respected and well known high profile businessman in the Midlands with a reputation to protect I suspect he will have only joined the board in such a high profile role having done his due diligence and received clear assurances about what Randy expects of him. He has a reputation to protect and personally I think, given all of that, he actually is probably quite a good and maybe a clever appointment.

OK he has not got any of the so called and perhaps mythical 'football experience' but the reality such people are thin on he ground and with a couple of exceptions are not generally Chairmen of football clubs these days. Posters have talked of the likes of Graham Taylor or Big Ron both of whom have very little or no experience of being involved in actually running a football club. As for Steve Stride he struck me as Ellis's yes man and having met him once, not very inspiring and he has never worked in English football since leaving Villa.

Its entirely possible he will challenge and force changes that might be good for the club but as when we sign players he has been written off by many fans before he has even started. As in all likelihood we will relegated the job he will have to do will not be for the faint hearted. His reputation in the Midlands will, in part, hang on him restoring our fortunes which is actually in line with Randy's desire to sell the club for the best possible price.

[TrentVilla]

 

The circus has a new ring master.

This appointment is akin to rearranging the chairs on the titanic as the band played its final tune.

That is no reflection of this chap, I know nothing about him, I just know its 5 years too late. As is normally the case with Lerner, its too little too late.

Old Reg might be the perfect man for the job, who knows, in fact I'm almost tempted to say who gives a **** frankly such is my distain for Lerner and my despair with the club that is an utter utter shambles. Problem is he isn't going to be able to arrest our slide on and off the pitch no matter how capable he is.

I don't much subscribe to the "football man" school of thought, I mean what is a football man? It sounds too much like Harry *(*& face Redknapp speak to me and inevitably results in appointments like Niall Quinn. 

What we need, what we've needed for 8 years or more is someone willing and more importantly able to run the club and make sound decisions. 

We may or may not have found that person, problem is that the incompetent Lerner and the various incompetent people he has appointed previously have already ensured we have screwed the pooch. And quite frankly, given Lerner's judgement to date...... well..... this is hardly likely to be a good appointment is it.

[BigAl]

Don't know anything about Hollis .Will give him a chance but what worries me is that Lerner has prob got every appointment wrong he has had to make so far,they have all been disasters waiting to happen,hope this one is different but wouldn't my breath.

If we agree that the majority of Lerner's decisions have been poor, hiring someone to make those dates decisions for him could be seen as a positive thing. 

Faulkner and Fox were his appointments and both were out off there depth as CEO ,has a record with the Browns in NFL of poor appointments as well ,hope this will be different and this man will be a decent chairman for us but I don't trust lerners ability to appoint right man for job.

[sne]

5 minutes ago, TrentVilla said:

 

The circus has a new ring master.

This appointment is akin to rearranging the chairs on the titanic as the band played its final tune.

That is no reflection of this chap, I know nothing about him, I just know its 5 years too late. As is normally the case with Lerner, its too little too late.

Old Reg might be the perfect man for the job, who knows, in fact I'm almost tempted to say who gives a **** frankly such is my distain for Lerner and my despair with the club that is an utter utter shambles. Problem is he isn't going to be able to arrest our slide on and off the pitch no matter how capable he is.

I don't much subscribe to the "football man" school of thought, I mean what is a football man? It sounds too much like Harry *(*& face Redknapp speak to me and inevitably results in appointments like Niall Quinn. 

What we need, what we've needed for 8 years or more is someone willing and more importantly able to run the club and make sound decisions. 

We may or may not have found that person, problem is that the incompetent Lerner and the various incompetent people he has appointed previously have already ensured we have screwed the pooch. And quite frankly, given Lerner's judgement to date...... well..... this is hardly likely to be a good appointment is it.

Pretty much.

As long as Lerner is here we are still screwed 

[AntrimBlack]

46 minutes ago, Kingman said:

Pointless appointment, All we need is a manager that can manage and an owner to fund him.

Nope. We have had that, and it has not worked. What we needed was a Chairman in the country, in the club, involved. That is what we now have.

The question now is - will he be a success.

[Zatman]

3 hours ago, AshVilla said:

Well at least he grew up supporting Manchester City which meant he supported them when they were shite unlike 90% of their current fanbase

so he is used to watching shit football then

[John]

Our new chairman said on BBC Midlands Today tonight, "I'm with the fans but don't think you know there's a quick fix, you can go out and just spend money and it will fix it, its not that easy. The one thing that I'm very clear on after the various work I've done looking at this business model is that actually throwing money at it is not the issue".  

Looks to me that our "custodian" has appointed someone to take the flak and to say the things that we do not want to hear from him. I would rather in our present desperate position have put the money that our "custodian" was willing to spend on appointing a chairman towards the cost of signing say a goalkeeper or a forward in what remains of this window.   

[Blasterpocket68]

Same sinking ship different captain, Admiral Lerner remains as far away as possible. 

Poinless appointment just another paid mouth  , nothing will change until we are sold , we are in serious decline under this clueless leadership!!!!!!!

[Stevo985]

6 hours ago, DCJonah said:

I'm not aware of all their backgrounds. Do all of them have the same experience as Fox and Hollis in their roles? 

I'd be surprised if the majority of premier league clubs had men with little experience in football making all the big sporting decisions. I may be completely wrong though and in that case, I guess yes, we just have to have faith. 

I posted it earlier. Of the 20 premier league chairmen, only 2 had footballing experience before taking on their current role as chairman (well three if you count Gold and Sullivan as two people, but I'm talking in terms of clubs)

I didn't look at CEOs, but I'd wager a lot of them have less footballing experience than Fox. That's just a hunch though.

Edited January 14, 2016 by Stevo985

[ozvillafan]

39 minutes ago, John said:

Our new chairman said on BBC Midlands Today tonight, "I'm with the fans but don't think you know there's a quick fix, you can go out and just spend money and it will fix it, its not that easy. The one thing that I'm very clear on after the various work I've done looking at this business model is that actually throwing money at it is not the issue".  

Looks to me that our "custodian" has appointed someone to take the flak and to say the things that we do not want to hear from him. I would rather in our present desperate position have put the money that our "custodian" was willing to spend on appointing a chairman towards the cost of signing say a goalkeeper or a forward in what remains of this window.   

He's right. Spending money won't fix it.

However, Spending money wisely might.

Considering staying in the PL is our biggest revenue stream and has a knock-on effect for all other revenue (hardly a difficult business model) I'm disappointed that it sounds like we aren't going to try and the cost cutting is already beginning.

[OutByEaster?]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/35312385

 

Quote

Aston Villa do not fear relegation, says new chairman Steven Hollis

Aston Villa do not the fear the consequences of relegation from the Premier League and will come back "on a stronger footing" if they do go down, says new chairman Steven Hollis.

Villa are bottom of the table, eight points from safety, with 17 games left.

Hollis told BBC Sport the club needed "shaking up" but insisted that spending money on players was not the solution.

He will work with chief executive Tom Fox, who described the club's current football setup as "broken".

 

This is part of a longer article on the beeb, and one I don't like much at all.

It's this shaking up business that bothers me, you see, I reckon a football club is made up of three basic parts - its playing staff and coaches, its commercial teams and its bottom line.

Steven clearly feels there's a big job to do.

 

Quote

"Randy was very clear when I met him that there is some heavy lifting that needs doing at this club to address the structural flaws it has experienced over the last five years," said Hollis. "Randy wanted the work to be done and wanted it done quickly, hence I am here.

 

Structural flaws indeed.

 

Quote

"There is a big job to be done. And as chairman I really do want to bring back the confidence to this club, both on the playing side and non-playing side, so we can feel good about what we are doing.

"Time will tell if I am right or not. But I have spent six weeks looking at this and I genuinely believe this needs an overhaul and it needs some solid business principals inputting into it.

 

An overhaul. New principles. Sounds like the kind of thing we want right?

So Steven, what is it you're going to shake up?

The playing and coaching staff?

Well, not the coaches by the sound of things - you've said in that article that Randy believes in the manager. So I'm guessing he's not what you're looking to shake up. The team itself should be none of your business, you're neither qualified nor welcome to make decisions on who is a better right back out of Alan Hutton and Micah Richards - and you've already stated that throwing money at the team isn't the answer (even though it's undoubtedly the only think that is actually proven to work in this stupid league) - so I'm guessing the IN door doesn't hold any clues for us either.

So, unless you're sacking Gordon Cowans (clue Steve: Not clever) then I think we can rule the playing staff out of your immediate plans for shaking stuff.

So, maybe you're here to shake up the commercial team, get those incomes moving in the right direction?

So, sack Tom and his team and bring in new blood right? After all, if there's a need to address structural flaws, it has to start somewhere yes?

But Steven says that Randy is committed to support the board and the exec team - and indeed is positive about what they're doing.

In fact, Randy seems very positive - are you sure a shake up is what we need Steve?

 

Quote

"The principles Steve talks about are the ones we need to bring to our football setup so that when we got to our board and ask them to spend money on acquiring players or coaches, we have a good sense for how that investment is going to pay off for the owner and how it is ultimately going to deliver results on the pitch."

Hollis added: "Randy spent a lot of money last summer and we are not seeing the result of that. This is about hard work, commitment and a focus on continuous improvement."

 

Ignoring what does and doesn't constitute "a lot of money" in this league for a moment, there are some clues in here I think. Randy is a bit cross that he's spent a lot of money and got a lot of nothing and he's looking for someone to tell him that it makes them angry too and he can fix it. 

And here's the thing - if Steve Hollis isn't shaking up the coaching team, isn't spending a fortune on the squad, and isn't changing the exec team - where exactly is he focusing on structural changes, what is it he's shaking up?

I'm left with the feeling that he's here to balance the books - they're the only thing that's left  - now, we're going down, and our incomes aren't staying up without us, so our incomes are going to go down too - which means if he's here to shake things up, and do some heavy lifting, and push through structural change and he's not buying players and he's not sacking people at a high level, then to my mind, he's here to cut costs. I guess the positive aspect could be that he's here to get the books into shape in order to make us a more attractive proposition for sale - but that's barely hinted at in the article, and his quotes don't support it.

The article on the beeb tonight is the least focused, most negative and most disappointing thing I've heard come out of the club since Randy bought it - and it's his first one and the only one he's made. I'm a positive individual, but this one is keeping me up late and making me a pretty unhappy bunny.

Now, I sincerely hope that his words have been presented in a deliberate way by someone at the BBC and I very much hope I'm wrong and that the coming days and weeks will make his role clearer, and his plans more visible, but as an opening story from the chairman on his first day, I'm concerned.

Status report - new chairman - Day 1 - not so good.

(and that's without mentioning that he's allowed a reporter to half trick him into saying something that can be twisted into  - we're going down - on his first day.)

 

 

 

[ozvillafan]

Summed up well, OBE (certainly better put than anything I could write) - and yes, it is massively disappointing.

I just hope this is our only relegation and we don't sink further after the "shake up".

[avfc1982]

I'm sure it's been mentioned somewhere on this forum but there's rumours of Brian Little and Mervyn King joining Villa's board. What do we think of that then?

[Bunnski]

I'm sure it's been mentioned somewhere on this forum but there's rumours of Brian Little and Mervyn King joining Villa's board. What do we think of that then?

Nothing unless it gets confirmed

[briny_ear]

14 hours ago, Villan4Life said:

Appointed a new chairman.

But yet again appoints someone who has NO experience within Football.

 

http://www.avfc.co.uk/page/NewsDetail/0,,10265~5273031,00.html

 

 

My summary of this VERY wordy statement:

"I, Randy Lerner, am washing my hands of Aston Villa". 

[SeanO]

14 hours ago, Eames said:

I was once subbed off after 25 mins of a school 2nd XI match. I have football experience. Does that make me suitable?

 

EDIT - this football experience thing is the biggest load of crap going. Its a meaningless platitude dropped by knobheads in the media and ex-players to maintain some sort of bizarre exclusivity to a game that has become more and more commercial over the last few years. 

 

Gabby has masses of "football experience" and I wouldn't trust him to leave the house fully dressed let alone run a football club. 

I get your point but we have no one above RG who has brought any footballing experience to the club, besides even Gabby surely would have advised against TSM!!

I don't want just any old person with football experience involved at VP but there are some excellent people who could add some vital experience to the club out there.

That said how do you motivate tossers like CNZ who are multi millionaires but don't care about the club they are playing for? The worst that can happen to them is to be bombed out but this obviously not an issue for them as they are still picking up more money in one week than most people do in a year. With this type of player (and there are many, many of them) you couldn't get them on a performance based contract as they wouldn't sign one, so that's not the answer. Having someone with football experience might just spot this type of player before the club spend (in CNZ case) 30m on a waster.

A little experience could go a long way imo.

And he's a bloody MC fan, the tosser better be good!

[MrDuck]

Lerner in underwhelming appointment shocker

[SeanO]

3 hours ago, OutByEaster? said:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/35312385

 

 

This is part of a longer article on the beeb, and one I don't like much at all.

It's this shaking up business that bothers me, you see, I reckon a football club is made up of three basic parts - its playing staff and coaches, its commercial teams and its bottom line.

Steven clearly feels there's a big job to do.

 

 

Structural flaws indeed.

 

 

An overhaul. New principles. Sounds like the kind of thing we want right?

So Steven, what is it you're going to shake up?

The playing and coaching staff?

Well, not the coaches by the sound of things - you've said in that article that Randy believes in the manager. So I'm guessing he's not what you're looking to shake up. The team itself should be none of your business, you're neither qualified nor welcome to make decisions on who is a better right back out of Alan Hutton and Micah Richards - and you've already stated that throwing money at the team isn't the answer (even though it's undoubtedly the only think that is actually proven to work in this stupid league) - so I'm guessing the IN door doesn't hold any clues for us either.

So, unless you're sacking Gordon Cowans (clue Steve: Not clever) then I think we can rule the playing staff out of your immediate plans for shaking stuff.

So, maybe you're here to shake up the commercial team, get those incomes moving in the right direction?

So, sack Tom and his team and bring in new blood right? After all, if there's a need to address structural flaws, it has to start somewhere yes?

But Steven says that Randy is committed to support the board and the exec team - and indeed is positive about what they're doing.

In fact, Randy seems very positive - are you sure a shake up is what we need Steve?

 

 

Ignoring what does and doesn't constitute "a lot of money" in this league for a moment, there are some clues in here I think. Randy is a bit cross that he's spent a lot of money and got a lot of nothing and he's looking for someone to tell him that it makes them angry too and he can fix it. 

And here's the thing - if Steve Hollis isn't shaking up the coaching team, isn't spending a fortune on the squad, and isn't changing the exec team - where exactly is he focusing on structural changes, what is it he's shaking up?

I'm left with the feeling that he's here to balance the books - they're the only thing that's left  - now, we're going down, and our incomes aren't staying up without us, so our incomes are going to go down too - which means if he's here to shake things up, and do some heavy lifting, and push through structural change and he's not buying players and he's not sacking people at a high level, then to my mind, he's here to cut costs. I guess the positive aspect could be that he's here to get the books into shape in order to make us a more attractive proposition for sale - but that's barely hinted at in the article, and his quotes don't support it.

The article on the beeb tonight is the least focused, most negative and most disappointing thing I've heard come out of the club since Randy bought it - and it's his first one and the only one he's made. I'm a positive individual, but this one is keeping me up late and making me a pretty unhappy bunny.

Now, I sincerely hope that his words have been presented in a deliberate way by someone at the BBC and I very much hope I'm wrong and that the coming days and weeks will make his role clearer, and his plans more visible, but as an opening story from the chairman on his first day, I'm concerned.

Status report - new chairman - Day 1 - not so good.

(and that's without mentioning that he's allowed a reporter to half trick him into saying something that can be twisted into  - we're going down - on his first day.)

 

 

 

Whenever I read/hear Continuous Improvement the words always mean "cut backs". I have worked in businesses that use CI for savings, i.e find a cheaper solution. In the case of food on match days maybe a different supplier could save the club money by supplying cheaper products that hopefully the supporters will buy but cheaper solution on the footballing side means we will end up relegated and struggling coming back up.

I miss looking forward to seeing Villa play, the excitement of watching players like Brian Little, Andy Gray, Denis Mortimer, God and more recently John Carew, Ashley Young, James Milner andChristen Benteke. The crowds anticipation of being entertained...........now we get to watch the likes of Gestade, Richardson, Sinclair, CNZ etc bastardize the experience, after reading the crap statements released these players are now going to be those we get to see at best. Football's f**ked but at Aston Villa we really are f**king f**ked!  

Randy Lerner has been the single worst thing to happen to Aston Villa, until he goes we are never going to be "Prepared".

[kurtsimonw]

Love a good overreaction

[OutByEaster?]

Mine is a bit of an overreaction, something in the statement and the interview just doesn't quite sit right for me. Thinking about it, I guess what I don't like most is that I don't quite understand what his role is. Further up the thread, someone mentions that he's in a non-executive role, but he's describing himself in a very hands on way. In my head, I guess the role of the Chairman in a company is to establish boundaries and encourage ideas - they're not the people that drive a business, they're more a form of governance for the people that do. From what I've seen so far, Mr Hollis is talking about his role in the kind of language that I would have thought would be the preserve of Tom Fox. 

I guess I'm just a bit confused about this shaking up thing, I'm keen to know what it is he wants to shake up, what sort of specifics he's looking to apply new principles to, and what his job is. I'm also not entirely unconvinced that we actually got here through an ongoing series of of shake ups and new principles and that it might do us some good if someone stopped shaking the club and gave it time for a set of principles to settle in.

I quite like Tom Fox, I have a certain faith in what he's trying to do (which I know isn't a popular view), I quite like Remi Garde, I have a certain faith in what he's trying to do (ditto) - I'm not sure what the Chairman's role is in helping them turn the club around, and I don't think that what we've heard so far explains it. 

I'm hoping it's just me that sees things as more muddled than they were the day before yesterday. I'm hoping he's the right man for whatever the job is. I wish him luck.