SPECULATION : Milner to City/Utd/Chelsea/Spurs

[P3te]

selling big to buy slightly less big worked for spurs, it can work for us if we're smart

[BOF]

£30million is nearly half what Randy paid for the entire club.

I don't want Milner to go, and will be disappointed if he does. But £30million is a lot of money - and personally I don't think we'll get Champions League with or without Milner - it'd take a brave man to turn down £30m.

Saying that, you'd have to be brave to bid that for a player who isn't an international regular.

Pretty much all of this.

[bannedfromHandV]

30M plus Ireland and Richards

45M cash

15M and Tevez

I'm afraid I don't think any of those are actually realistic. I could see him going for 30m cash or player exchange combined value. I would be surprised to see him going for much more than that. If they pay a value of 45m I would piss myself laughing but I just don't see it. It could be argued they are **** dumb - see Lescott/Dunne deals - but are they actually dumb enough to meet a 45m valuation? I would love to think so but I suspect not.

I think we need to get slightly real here guys as this is getting a little far-fetched.

£45M is daft, it's not going to happen, particularly not in a summer when David Villa has gone for £37M, and he truly is a world superstar.

I would imagine the ceiling for this deal if it happens is £30M, which in itself is probably double what he's actually worth.

[kidlewis]

Man City are retarded when it comes to transfers. They are trying to do the equivalent of a champ manager multiple account, becoming managers of different clubs and trying to buy their best players. It's not working.

[P3te]

£45M is daft, it's not going to happen, particularly not in a summer when David Villa has gone for £37M, and he truly is a world superstar.

I would imagine the ceiling for this deal if it happens is £30M, which in itself is probably double what he's actually worth.

straight cash, £45m wont happen, definitely

but add in players (which are completely open to valuation by everyone) and it might get close to that

say they offered £20m plus ireland plus onouha, whos to stop joe journalist deciding ireland is £15m and onouha is £8m, which leaves it at a completely unrealistic (but also perfectly reasonable to speculate on) £43m

[Guest av1]

Man City are retarded when it comes to transfers. They are trying to do the equivalent of a champ manager multiple account, becoming managers of different clubs and trying to buy their best players. It's not working.

Its a method that will take them to the top, long, long before we get there

[Worrall]

My thoughts on this are that, Everton sold Rooney for something like this and build a pretty great squad from the money. Milner too me is nowhere near as good as Rooney. And yes there is the question of ambition but the truth of the matter is, we don't have the money City do.

So lets get $30m and improve the areas we need to improve, centre midfield, right back and centre forward.

To me delph will be quite a player and if we got Ireland and someone else than we could go and buy a top quality forward.

[Richard]

Richard, if we buy top quiality players we'd have an even bigger loss for the next financial year than the 46 million announced, as our revenue would be unlikely to increase much. Even qualifying for the Champions League would bring much less than that in revenue.

Do you see this as a good way forward for our club? Is it ambition spending much more than what one can generate? I don't see it this way and don't want Villa to keep announcing huge financial losses in the future.

Unfortunately the way of the football world these days requires mega money if you want to be successful. Now if we want that, and it appears to be an aim of the club, then we need to spend to achieve.

if we do not want to be successful and maintain a position of between 6 and 10 with the odd cup run then fine, I'd take that. It's just that the club apparently want to achieve better things

If we do not invest in better players then we will always lose out to other clubs I'm afraid and basically become a feeder club, if we aren't already

[Richard]

15M and Tevez

Would you not accept that deal then?

[Adbo9]

personally, I think milner is massively overrated, and if we get wods of cash and Stephen Ireland well have the best end of the deal by far....... If ireland gets back to the form of pre-mancini then well have a far better player............

[CarewsEyebrowDesigner]

I think the point is it'll never, ever, ever, ever happen.

[BOF]

15M and Tevez

Would you not accept that deal then?

I think what he means is it is vastly vastly more than Milner is worth. Tevez on his own is worth more than Milner.

[Richard]

£30million is nearly half what Randy paid for the entire club.

I don't want Milner to go, and will be disappointed if he does. But £30million is a lot of money - and personally I don't think we'll get Champions League with or without Milner - it'd take a brave man to turn down £30m.

Saying that, you'd have to be brave to bid that for a player who isn't an international regular.

Yes I think I can also agree with that. The one thing I disagree with slightly is the getting CL with or without Milner. I think we can get it with Milner as long as we invest in quality around him.

So with him we are part the way there

I think without him it not only sends a message to other players and clubs but it puts us at a massive disadvantage compared to other clubs.

So our chances of it are much better with him than without him, if we took the next step.

[Richard]

15M and Tevez

Would you not accept that deal then?

I think what he means is it is vastly vastly more than Milner is worth. Tevez on his own is worth more than Milner.

I dont disagree but that was not the question I was asked now was it.

[BOF]

I think the answer would obviously be yes but if we're going to be silly, why stop there :?

[kidlewis]

Doesn't matter what Milner is worth, he is under contract and we can put whatever price we think city will pay. THey have the money so lets up it. Milner is worth about £18-£20m so lets add 50% boom!

[BG_Villa_Fan]

Richard, if we buy top quiality players we'd have an even bigger loss for the next financial year than the 46 million announced, as our revenue would be unlikely to increase much. Even qualifying for the Champions League would bring much less than that in revenue.

Do you see this as a good way forward for our club? Is it ambition spending much more than what one can generate? I don't see it this way and don't want Villa to keep announcing huge financial losses in the future.

Unfortunately the way of the football world these days requires mega money if you want to be successful. Now if we want that, and it appears to be an aim of the club, then we need to spend to achieve.

if we do not want to be successful and maintain a position of between 6 and 10 with the odd cup run then fine, I'd take that. It's just that the club apparently want to achieve better things

If we do not invest in better players then we will always lose out to other clubs I'm afraid and basically become a feeder club, if we aren't already

I hear you, Richard, but as we've seen with Man City even spending close to 300 million does not guarantee Champions League football or silverwear and when they get in the CL they'd need 10 years worth of prize money to even out what they've spent only on transfer fees for the past couple of years. I do not envy this model and don't want Villa to be like that, nevertheless I do agree that their approach is far more likely to get them CL football.

Still, though, as much as I'd like to see world class players come to Villa, I want the funds for them to come from the club's revenue streams and not from loans ( from whoever and wherever they might be ). I want Randy to improve the club's ability to make money, and be self sustained, don't want to read how much our next year's expected financial loss might be or how much debt we're into.

[Richard]

Still, though, as much as I'd like to see world class players come to Villa, I want the funds for them to come from the club's revenue streams and not from loans ( from whoever and wherever they might be ). I want Randy to improve the club's ability to make money, and be self sustained, don't want to read how much our next year's expected financial loss might be or how much debt we're into.

What comes first, the chicken or the egg ?

I do not think a club like us is going to achieve it without large investment. The notion of self funding it is all very nice , worthy and quant but I'm afraid the days of that are long gone.

Manure self fund? Well they got to the position of CL qualification when the days of big spend were not relatively as much as they are now

Liverpool cannot self fund.

Arsenal fund by virtue of being there for a while

Chelsea - nuff said

Citeh - nuff said

Spuds - regardless of what has been said they have spent big

My assertion is we will never get there down the self fund route, there'snothing wrong with that by the way. CL is not the be all and end all for me, but it is where the club have said they want to be and if you want to play with the big boys it seems as though it's the place to be

[P3te]

Spuds - regardless of what has been said they have spent big

thats coz theyre able to sell on players for far more than they bought them for, on a consistent basis

its a means to an end, and probably the only way we could hope to go about it

the trick is to replace smartly though, with players you can potentially sell on again for even more money, allowing you to step up again to a higher level of player

[Woodytom]

15M and Tevez

Would you not accept that deal then?

I would probably give them 15million and Milner for Tevez