Risso Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 The finances need to be brought under control, but he needs to appoint a good manager to guide the club through the tough times, he's failed on that score. It's worth remembering Daniel Levy was failing at Spurs for a long time, the upturn in fortunes came after they finally bungled their way to appointing Redknapp. Now, apparently, he's brilliant. At which point were Spurs selling off all their better players and not replacing them due to chronic financial mismanagement? Levy might have made mistakes (and I'm sure he'd agree) but he never gave up as Lerner has. People think McLeish is a mistake, which of course he is, but I think it was a very deliberate ploy by Lerner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazdavies79 Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 I think Spurs are able to sail through the rough times on the field much easier than us as their revenues are higher. We were reaching much further beyond our 'natural' position but were a bit too ambitious in hindsight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cule4life Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 I wan't us to be sustainable. It's the only way to bring success to the club, not by Lerner ploughing in millions. He has ploughed in millions though, and we're in the same position we were when he took over. Well actually, our financial position is a lot worse. So either he's going to start spending money again, which I doubt, or he's going to have to sell, which I hope for.Exactly this. It bemuses me that people cannot see this as to me it is self evident THIS !!! Were in a much worse financial position and worse football wise because most of the players are shite and the manager ? It's Mcleish... nuff said. Honestly Randy has thrown his money into a fire and its his own fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KHV Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 The finances need to be brought under control, but he needs to appoint a good manager to guide the club through the tough times, he's failed on that score. It's worth remembering Daniel Levy was failing at Spurs for a long time, the upturn in fortunes came after they finally bungled their way to appointing Redknapp. Now, apparently, he's brilliant. No he wasnt failing, spurs have always kept a very good grip on the financial aspects of their club. Thay have retuned profit for many years even prior to Redknapp. Their wage bill is 46% of their revenue which when compared to villa who had wages of 83% of their revenue is a huge difference. Tottenham have had a wage cap for a long time. If we kept wages under control like spurs and they were only 46% our wage bill would be £42.32m . We should have a wage cap at around 35k per week. If we did that we would have to get rid of Bent,Heskey,Gabby,Dunne,Collins,Given,Warnock,Ireland,Nzogbia. Maybe we should sell everyone and start again. Our wage bill was about £23m before Lerner took over and now its about £80m. I think Randy gets financial advice from Peter Risdale Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazdavies79 Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 No he wasnt failing On the pitch they were was the point I was making, which led on to my second point that with their better revenue they coped better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maqroll Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 I think Spurs are able to sail through the rough times on the field much easier than us as their revenues are higher. We were reaching much further beyond our 'natural' position but were a bit too ambitious in hindsight. You can never be too ambitious. The problem was they took ambition down a dark alley and raped it with ineptitude. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazdavies79 Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 That's an unbalanced summary, we had three sixth placed finishes. We gave big contracts to players who were not good enough to progress us higher, but of course the manager chooses the players, the chairman chooses the manager. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 The chariman chooses how much the manager has to spend. O'Neill was effectively put in charge of the finances of the club, with disasterous consequences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazdavies79 Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 Moving forward, I think a wage budget should be set and the manager should be given a, not completely, but pretty free reign with that budget. There should be a few age and injury related caveats that dictate the sorts of contracts that will be awarded, that the manager has to adhere to. Ultimately the best person qualified at the club to judge a players real value is the manager, the money men can set budgets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amsterdam_Neil_D Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 The chariman chooses how much the manager has to spend. O'Neill was effectively put in charge of the finances of the club, with disasterous consequences. It was the right plan IMO, just the wrong manager to do it. A half decent manager with the same resources would have increased the value of the players by actually winning things. The wages would not be a issue as the trading in players sold would have bought more money in. The failure to get into the CL was criminal given the resources made available and this killed us down the line. We might have been able to hold onto a few as well instead of feeding the top four. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Majkee Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 Moving forward, I think a wage budget should be set and the manager should be given a, not completely, but pretty free reign with that budget. There should be a few age and injury related caveats that dictate the sorts of contracts that will be awarded, that the manager has to adhere to. Ultimately the best person qualified at the club to judge a players real value is the manager, the money men can set budgets.this! the basic managerial error has been done by Randy here hence the current budget situation is/was bad (wages/turnover). i doubt there was any 5 years plan when something basic as wage budget or wage/turnover ratio was missing. i am sad to write it, but it seems that Randy falls into category "rich daddy pet". not a managerial owner, or he was not focused enough on Villa despite that tattoo and words. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 The failure to get into the CL was criminal given the resources made available Ridiculous statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amsterdam_Neil_D Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 The failure to get into the CL was criminal given the resources made available Ridiculous statement. Not really, think of all the times we were in a cracking position, "If Villa win this they will be 4 points clear of 5th" and the like...... Oh dear bottled it again and again, when it was realised the house of straw was not sufficient he left. If people don't see it then I can't help that, that's not my problem but that's the good thing about history, it's kind of set in stone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voinjama Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 That 08/09 collapse could haunt this club for a long long time. :cry: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 The failure to get into the CL was criminal given the resources made available Ridiculous statement. Not really, think of all the times we were in a cracking position, "If Villa win this they will be 4 points clear of 5th" and the like...... Oh dear bottled it again and again, when it was realised the house of straw was not sufficient he left. If people don't see it then I can't help that, that's not my problem but that's the good thing about history, it's kind of set in stone. Facts are set in stone. I suggest you go and look at the money city and spurs spent on players from the day MON got the job and then try and make the claim you did earlier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mallett Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 I saw a link to this blog post - 'Aston Villa - Prophets and Losses' on the Guardian website. The blog is called the Swiss Ramble. It has an interesting analysis of our financial situation. Here is a small excerpt from it: "This marked a change in Villa’s strategy under Lerner. Initially, they spent big in an attempt to reach the promised land of the Champions League, but the prophet failed to deliver. The heavy spending only took the club so far, even though Krulak felt that it should have produced more, “We believed we had set the club up for success.” They had possibly not reckoned on the changing environment, whereby Manchester City’s new found wealth added a further layer of inflation to that already established by Abramovich’s Chelsea. Even though they invested significant sums, it was not enough to consistently compete with the leading clubs, despite a series of hefty financial losses. It now looks as if Lerner has pulled back before the wage bill becomes completely unsustainable, which is the sensible thing to do – though it may mean that Villa have to settle for mid-table anonymity instead of challenging for a place in the top four in future. Still, as Tennyson said, ‘tis better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all." blog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HackneyVillain Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 Thanks, a good and well-balanced read even though I don't agree with everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mykeyb Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 I really don get the wage thing. Take a look at our first team squad and count how many young kis are in it. I really cannot see how the rest of the squads wages can be as high as they would need to be to account for such huge loses..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KHV Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 I really don get the wage thing. Take a look at our first team squad and count how many young kids are in it. I really cannot see how the rest of the squads wages can be as high as they would need to be to account for such huge loses..... they say wages should be no more than 60% of your revenue so villas wage bill should be £55.2m It is reported our wage bill was £83.4m. When I calculate the wages I cant get anywhere near £83.4m and I am sure I am being generous with the salaries of the 1st team squad of 25 players. I get the 1st team wages up to about £45m and then I cant get £38.4m for a manger,coaches,physios,youth players,directors,matchday staff and admin staff etc something just doesnt seem to add up to me :? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P3te Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 When I calculate the wages I cant get anywhere near £83.4m and I am sure I am being generous with the salaries of the 1st team squad of 25 players. I get the 1st team wages up to about £45m and then I cant get £38.4m for a manger,coaches,physios,youth players,directors,matchday staff and admin staff etc something just doesnt seem to add up to me :? had a go at this myself and got approximately the same figures however it's worth remembering that our last figures were from june 2010 to may 2011, so there wouldve been a LOT of high earners in there who we've since moved on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts