Jump to content

Steven Hollis


Villan4Life

Recommended Posts

Just now, bannedfromHandV said:

We just need to be taken over, desperately so.

 

Then we can kiss goodbye to Lerner and his oft' bizarre staff appointments.

 

 

The paradox about this club is that:

we need a new owner

but

whilst the current owner continues running things, we'll never be in a state attractive enough for a potential new owner to show interest.

the real irony is that we need a beancounter to sort out all the nooks & cranies to put the vlub on a stable footing to be attractive enough to sell

as much a one can find that fact displeasing, is even more the fact that its what is needed.

 

SH is not a new broom, he's a dyson assigned to suck all the shit up out of this club.

well good luck to him with that. Thats one hell of a pile of shit that needs filtering out.

I personally think the next couple of phases for this club will be

1) SH put handbrake firmly on any unneccessary spending.

2) sells off whatever is sellable

3) establishes a "free-functioning" level (no RL investment needed).

4) can go 2 ways

4a) Enables RL to recouperate £200mill bringing the sale price down in accordance to what "hit" RL is prepared to take - then sell.

4b) agressive "sale" push to finially rid RL of AVFC

5) New start with new owners - good luck getting us through the leagues

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TRO said:

Terry, believe me I have gone way past, being p***** off but , I'm now in the zone where I am looking for the crocusses to appear.....a point where we can start to turn this Ocean liner around.

FWIW  I agree with Hollis....I don't think that Money alone will fix it....bury me if you want....but thats what I think.

However, I do think in the "here and now" we need to buy our way out of this mess.

I hear you say that sounds contradictory....not quite.

What I am saying is we simply cannot afford to buy any more players that are not going to work.....we have had our unfair share of them.

We MUST get the next bunch of signings ..right.

Ps However paradoxically.....if I thought we had someone at the club that could spot talent and bring it in......I think money alone would fix it.

No-one thinks "money alone will fix this". Clearly you need to find the right players and bring them in. Literally everyone is agreed on this

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, blandy said:

No It isn't. and No It doesn't.

in every season going back 4 seasons, looking at soccerbase for comparison, Spurs have made a profit from selling and buying. In every season of the last 4, Villa has spent more than it got back in.

We've actually spent net, a lot more than Spurs.

We spent in the summer, net, 8.1 million.  Spurs made 9.3 mill profit.

we spent 5.9 million the previous season, Spurs made 5.1 mill profit

we spent 17.2 million spent the year before , Spurs made 12 million profit

We spent 22.45 mill the previous season to that, and Spurs made 0.5 million profit.

If money were the reason, Spurs having repeatedly sold players off and replaced them with cheaper players, would be struggling down the bottom and we'd be higher up the table.

You could, if you were being particularly stubborn, say "ah, but the total money spent, ignoring money got back from sales is massively higher for Spurs" and you'd be right. Something like 216 million (Spurs) v 101 million (Villa) over the last 4 years." So Spurs have a team on which 200+ million has been invested, and We've got one where only 100 million has been invested.

But if it were just money spent that counted, why are we behind so many clubs who (gross) have spent less than us? Norwich, Watford, Bournemouth, Leicester and even longer established Prem Clubs.

It really isn't about just money. That's easy to prove with facts. Unfortunately it's about waste, incompetence. lack of continuity, neglect - Intangible things.

 

 

It's all about money. We never grew our revenue or reinvested our sales aswell as Spurs. They also had the luxury of selling a player for our total yearly revenue!! We have been badly managed so let's hope we have the right people in place now to do it properly. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dn1982 said:

It's all about money. We never grew our revenue or reinvested our sales aswell as Spurs. They also had the luxury of selling a player for our total yearly revenue!! We have been badly managed so let's hope we have the right people in place now to do it properly. 

To put it another way, if it's only about money spent, then we've spent a lot more than about half the clubs in the Prem. so we shouldn't be bottom, but we should be well behind Spurs - if it's "all about money" 

If it's about money spent after taking account of players sold, then we should be ahead of Spurs and ahead of a bunch of other clubs too.

So it's obviously and clearly and demonstrably not "all about money". As you say " We have been badly managed so let's hope we have the right people in place now to do it properly" the owner and the club has spent money, but got little or no value or return for the spending. That's due to poor decision making, changing manager frequently, spending a ton, then spending nothing, then spending again.

You're right too, about commercial income. Money can be a big factor, but we've had and spent lots of it and got nowhere for it. The factor missing from Villa is knowledge, nouse, experience - call it what you will. We've used money badly, very badly. Others have used far less money to far more effect.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, blandy said:

. We've used money badly, very badly. Others have used far less money to far more effect.

The whole Lerner period summed up perfectly in one sentence

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, blandy said:
1 hour ago, blandy said:

To put it another way, if it's only about money spent, then we've spent a lot more than about half the clubs in the Prem. so we shouldn't be bottom, but we should be well behind Spurs - if it's "all about money" 

If it's about money spent after taking account of players sold, then we should be ahead of Spurs and ahead of a bunch of other clubs too.

So it's obviously and clearly and demonstrably not "all about money". As you say " We have been badly managed so let's hope we have the right people in place now to do it properly" the owner and the club has spent money, but got little or no value or return for the spending. That's due to poor decision making, changing manager frequently, spending a ton, then spending nothing, then spending again.

You're right too, about commercial income. Money can be a big factor, but we've had and spent lots of it and got nowhere for it. The factor missing from Villa is knowledge, nouse, experience - call it what you will. We've used money badly, very badly. Others have used far less money to far more effect.

No It isn't. and No It doesn't.

in every season going back 4 seasons, looking at soccerbase for comparison, Spurs have made a profit from selling and buying. In every season of the last 4, Villa has spent more than it got back in.

We've actually spent net, a lot more than Spurs.

We spent in the summer, net, 8.1 million.  Spurs made 9.3 mill profit.

we spent 5.9 million the previous season, Spurs made 5.1 mill profit

we spent 17.2 million spent the year before , Spurs made 12 million profit

We spent 22.45 mill the previous season to that, and Spurs made 0.5 million profit.

If money were the reason, Spurs having repeatedly sold players off and replaced them with cheaper players, would be struggling down the bottom and we'd be higher up the table.

You could, if you were being particularly stubborn, say "ah, but the total money spent, ignoring money got back from sales is massively higher for Spurs" and you'd be right. Something like 216 million (Spurs) v 101 million (Villa) over the last 4 years." So Spurs have a team on which 200+ million has been invested, and We've got one where only 100 million has been invested.

But if it were just money spent that counted, why are we behind so many clubs who (gross) have spent less than us? Norwich, Watford, Bournemouth, Leicester and even longer established Prem Clubs.

It really isn't about just money. That's easy to prove with facts. Unfortunately it's about waste, incompetence. lack of continuity, neglect - Intangible things.

 

 

You think money isn't the main reason.  I think it is.

In no particular order,.............Firstly I don't consider we are 'behind' Norwich, Leicester, Watford, Bournemouth....5 minutes ago Leicester were on their way down and in 5 minutes time could be again.  I also don't see the relevance of Clubs who have spent less but only been in the Premier 5 minutes.  Now Everton, yes, they have lower spending, long term Premier League status, and are a similar size.  A good example of if you get the money right AND get a decent Manager in for a period you can do ok.  But Everton are as far away from challenging for the title as they have ever been, and could be argued to be only a season or so, or a poor Managerial appointment or so, away from our predicament.  Everton fans are as racked off with the overall level of investment at their Club as we are. (well the ones I know are).

Secondly I didn't say "just about money" - only an idiot would say that, just as ,I respectfully suggest, only an idiot would say 'This is not about spending money. That is not the reason why the club is not doing well. Being successful at football needs decent players (some of whom are expensive, some not), decent Managers, decent stewardship, decent scouting, decent all sorts of things.  But more than any other single thing it needs money !!  Go back through the title winners as many years as you like and the vast majority will be there or thereabouts at the top spenders.  Try telling Man City fans, or Real Madrid fans, that its not crucial !

Of course the money needs to be spent well, and it often hasn't been.  But Spurs money often wasn't too. Man United don't seem to have spent well lately, but it isn't just lately, Fergie bought loads of crap.  But apart from his 'golden generation' all the rest of his success needed massive financing.  Did infrastructure and a great scouting system find Ronaldo ? Nope, he was bought. The list would be huge.

I'm not an accountant, I'm not interested in the debates about net spending.   And unlike you and Hollis, I'm not interested in the 'last 4 years' or 3, or 5 , or whatever.  I'm saying, if we want continued success we need to spend money.  Lots of it.  And when we buy crap we sell them off and buy another lot.  The other year Spurs, by common consent, mis-spent a fortune (the Bale money). They chopped and changed Managers.  So have they slipped into the Championship ?.....No, they are challenging for the title, and it IS on the back of the money they have spent (spent, not netted) together with the essentials of a decent Manager and a good goalscorer.  Does anyone really think they would be challenging had they bought largely lower League players and sold Kane ?

Man City.  They can have all the infrastructure in the World, and do have. But they know they need to spend money.

I have no doubt that run carefully, with a terrific youth set up, coaching, nice paintwork, a good shirt sponsorship, and better cake, we can stop sinking, and maybe even establish ourselves as one of a group of 10-20 other Clubs with the exact same ideas and similar fanbases, and we can yo-yo between 10th in The Premier League and 8th in the Championship.

But I bet you a million billion pounds that without significant, regular, big spending that is all we will ever do, throw in the odd glory season along the way.

And I still say, that Hollis HAS identified not spending money almost as if spending caused the problems, but all his la di da infrastructure stuff, well, it remains to be seen what exactly that is.

For years I've worked in Local Government and listened to politicians saying we can't fix ABC "just by throwing money at it, we need to be cleverer, faster, smarter, etc etc".......and for years and years I've witnessed at first hand what utter rubbish that view is.  It is true it can't be done JUST by throwing money at it, but even truer is that without the money it can't be done at all.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, blandy said:

No It isn't. and No It doesn't.

in every season going back 4 seasons, looking at soccerbase for comparison, Spurs have made a profit from selling and buying. In every season of the last 4, Villa has spent more than it got back in.

We've actually spent net, a lot more than Spurs.

:snip:

 

I can see what you're saying, but it's more complex than that.  We could sell one player for £1m and buy one for £5m and have made a £4m loss.  Spurs could sell a player for £90m and sign 6 players at £15m each and they'd break even.  So we "spent" more than them but have a far worse squad.

Agree that it's more intangible than just cash though.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, NurembergVillan said:

I can see what you're saying, but it's more complex than that.  We could sell one player for £1m and buy one for £5m and have made a £4m loss.  Spurs could sell a player for £90m and sign 6 players at £15m each and they'd break even.  So we "spent" more than them but have a far worse squad.

Agree that it's more intangible than just cash though.

Absolutely. Like I wrote, spurs have paid over 200 million for players in the past 4 years, and villa around 100 million gross. Trouble is we've bought God knows how many left backs, all of them no good ( for example). That 100 mill should have got the club far better. It really isn't money that's been our problem, but I don't want to repeat myself further, so I'll stop here.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Money alone might not fix us, but other factors without money won't. 

Fox, Randy & Hollis seem to have convinced themselves that they have tried to spending big and it didnt work.

In fact what we have tried since MON left is trying to spend a bit while also reducing the wage bill. this led our actual strategy to be buying the unproven, the cast offs and the past it. Each kind is a gamble, a couple paid off, then left, leaving us with the rest. 

For me the low risk strategy it is not more austerity, it is buying proven quality to build a squad around. Thats what we should hav been doing this window. Just when , to their credit, they finally hired a manager worth backing they pulled the plug entirely on spending.

Now the most likely outcome is we get relegated and garde walks due to being hung out to dry with no new players. 

I do not enjoy moaning about my club, but dammit the boards lack of investment this window is incredibly short sighted and foolish.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well you said in 3 lines what Ive been trying to say in a zillion pages.

 

Having said that, though, I'll shut up too, as like Blandy I weary of repeating myself on the issue.

Oh for the days when we had no idea and just turned up on a Saturday........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, briny_ear said:

 

Quiz.

Spot the point at which the logic goes wrong:

A) Aston Villa have spent a lot of money but not had succes

B ) therefore spending money doesn't guarantee sucess

C) therefore the way to be successful is not to spend any money

Nobody has said point C though.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Quiz.

Spot the point at which the logic goes wrong:

A) Aston Villa have spent a lot of money but not had succes

B ) therefore spending money doesn't guarantee sucess

C) therefore the way to be successful is not to spend any money

Nobody has said point C though.

Nobody has said points A or B either (I was summarising) but nor has any money been spent yet this window.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, blandy said:

Absolutely. Like I wrote, spurs have paid over 200 million for players in the past 4 years, and villa around 100 million gross. Trouble is we've bought God knows how many left backs, all of them no good ( for example). That 100 mill should have got the club far better. It really isn't money that's been our problem, but I don't want to repeat myself further, so I'll stop here.

I agree with you Pete, but having difficulty getting the point over, you seem to be struggling too.

Despite Villa Cas accusing me of saying things that everyone knows.....judging by your attempts, they clearly don't.

just in case I'm accused of not saying the same as you on this topic.....I am ......even if some folk are not interpreting it that way.

I could write reams and reams on it but still the point seems to get lost.

It seems some folk want to spend unlimited amounts of money until we eventually find the right players......at our rate BMH would appear like the camps at Calais.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â