PaulC Posted September 25, 2013 Share Posted September 25, 2013 At the moment he's still putting more in than he's taking out. I think his intention is pretty clean - he's not milking the club and I don't think he's going to make a massive profit when he sells it with the debt - I suspect he knows he can't afford to pay for us to compete and I think he's intending to both keep the club secure enough and prep it for a buyer if one comes around. It's not exciting, it's not going to push us up to sixth, but given the limitations of what he can financially achieve, I think it's sensible. I think we need to see the next set of accounts to know if this is the case or not. I don't think he is milking the club, to suggest he is makes no sense at all. I do think he is running the club in such a way as to get him money back though through the repayment of the loans as is his right. He won't sell the club with debt, that is rather the point, not for anything close to a price he would accept. But if he can keep costs down, keep us in the PL and remove the debt then he might just sell at a profit thanks to the new TV deal and walk away with his money back at least. I knows it symbolic - but is lack of attendance at games concerms me. I see no evidence that he is really interested anymore. Last Jan when we were starring relegation in the face - he provided only nominal funds for the manager, and that was when £50m worth of TV money was on the line. I think the best we can hope for is that Lambert does a job like Moyes did at Everton until the point when Lerner sells up - which can only be a couple of years away IMO - I hope he is better at finding buyers than he is at finding managers Yes but he went down the route before and we got stuck with Bent so guess he decided spending big in January doesn't pay off long-term. He has backed Lambert in his policy of buying young players. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isa Posted September 26, 2013 Share Posted September 26, 2013 So it is either spend big on Bent or spend peanuts on a bargain-basement signing like Simon Dawkins? Of course no in between was possible I assume? This January proved that Lerner was perfectly happy to stand idly by whilst the club looked to be sliding towards the Championship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thetrees Posted September 26, 2013 Share Posted September 26, 2013 So it is either spend big on Bent or spend peanuts on a bargain-basement signing like Simon Dawkins? Of course no in between was possible I assume? This January proved that Lerner was perfectly happy to stand idly by whilst the club looked to be sliding towards the Championship. I don't get the assumption regarding January. The owners track record has been to back his managers when asked. There is no evidence that Paul Lambert requested funding in January and, given PL's stubborn nature regarding the none-use of players on the books at that time, it appears that it was the manager who thought that he could see the season through with what he had. If that is the case, he was right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted September 26, 2013 Moderator Share Posted September 26, 2013 I seem to recall Lambert saying there wasn't money to spend in January. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avfc1982 Posted September 26, 2013 Share Posted September 26, 2013 Lambert took the job knowing fully well the financial restraints, so I'm sure he knew they'd be little or no money to spend last January. Lambert is guilty of not spending the cash he did have on the right players in the correct positions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BG_Villa_Fan Posted September 26, 2013 Share Posted September 26, 2013 Lambert took the job knowing fully well the financial restraints, so I'm sure he knew they'd be little or no money to spend last January. Lambert is guilty of not spending the cash he did have on the right players in the correct positions. Disagree - the right players for the correct positions require the right wages too, which is apparently out of Villa's capacity. He's either trying to build a squad or throwing things at the wall to see what sticks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted September 26, 2013 Share Posted September 26, 2013 I think people worrying about spending big money need to look at Lambert policy. I dont think he will make a big money/wage signing as he doesnt seem to like these players. Look at how he treated Given,Bent, Ireland etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharkyvilla Posted September 26, 2013 Share Posted September 26, 2013 I think people worrying about spending big money need to look at Lambert policy. I dont think he will make a big money/wage signing as he doesnt seem to like these players. Look at how he treated Given,Bent, Ireland etc He's also brought in an entirely new squad as the one he inherited was so terrible and didn't care about the club. There is no way we could have done that spending big money and it seems to me that he has little desire to. I still think the club have done remarkably well to have turned things round this quickly, in theory the curve should be going up pretty sharply from here on, it just needs time and patience and the fans can really help by getting behind the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted September 26, 2013 Share Posted September 26, 2013 What exactly have they turned round quickly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briny_ear Posted September 26, 2013 Share Posted September 26, 2013 And who are the "they" who have turned round whatever it is so quickly? This is a thread about Randy Lerner and I think he has been rather slow at recognising the flaws in his original spending policies and trying to find a new approach more suited to the size of his purse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PussEKatt Posted September 26, 2013 Share Posted September 26, 2013 And who are the "they" who have turned round whatever it is so quickly? This is a thread about Randy Lerner and I think he has been rather slow at recognising the flaws in his original spending policies and trying to find a new approach more suited to the size of his purse. I go along with that 110% Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mykeyb Posted September 26, 2013 Share Posted September 26, 2013 At the moment he's still putting more in than he's taking out. I think his intention is pretty clean - he's not milking the club and I don't think he's going to make a massive profit when he sells it with the debt - I suspect he knows he can't afford to pay for us to compete and I think he's intending to both keep the club secure enough and prep it for a buyer if one comes around. It's not exciting, it's not going to push us up to sixth, but given the limitations of what he can financially achieve, I think it's sensible. I think we need to see the next set of accounts to know if this is the case or not. I don't think he is milking the club, to suggest he is makes no sense at all. I do think he is running the club in such a way as to get him money back though through the repayment of the loans as is his right. He won't sell the club with debt, that is rather the point, not for anything close to a price he would accept. But if he can keep costs down, keep us in the PL and remove the debt then he might just sell at a profit thanks to the new TV deal and walk away with his money back at least. At this point I do not think Lerner is milking the club, but I do think he is putting it in a position where he will be able to start the process of the club repaying the loans he has made. This is purely for the point that he will not get all his money back if he sold the club as it is now. However despite comments from the board he is looking to sell the club and get out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted September 26, 2013 Share Posted September 26, 2013 So it is either spend big on Bent or spend peanuts on a bargain-basement signing like Simon Dawkins? Of course no in between was possible I assume? This January proved that Lerner was perfectly happy to stand idly by whilst the club looked to be sliding towards the Championship. I don't get the assumption regarding January. The owners track record has been to back his managers when asked. There is no evidence that Paul Lambert requested funding in January and, given PL's stubborn nature regarding the none-use of players on the books at that time, it appears that it was the manager who thought that he could see the season through with what he had. If that is the case, he was right. Is this a joke? No chance any manager who had a Xmas period like we did would turn down the chance to spend in January. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PussEKatt Posted September 26, 2013 Share Posted September 26, 2013 I said this once before and I will say it again now. Lerner can afford to buy a football club but he can not afford the ongoing cost of running it. Its as simple as that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted September 26, 2013 Share Posted September 26, 2013 He's a very wealthy man and 12 months ago sold one of his assets for $1 billion. We're also a club that makes more money than the majority of clubs. He can afford to run this club but his stupid decisions have cost him a fortune and now he's choosing not to spend more than he has to while we survive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharkyvilla Posted September 26, 2013 Share Posted September 26, 2013 What exactly have they turned round quickly? The squad. We've had a massive turnover of players in basically 12 months, the wage bill is under control, the players we have should only get better and they've probably added more than £50m in value to the squad. This instead of seeing £30m a season go straight down the toilet. Big John, Randy is valued at £600m by most sources which is obviously very wealthy but if he continued donating £30m a year to us like he has done then within 20 years he'd be bankrupt. I know that is an extreme example but I think he has a right to try and run the club on a different model. It's not as if he didn't have a proper good go at doing it the other way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PussEKatt Posted September 26, 2013 Share Posted September 26, 2013 He's a very wealthy man and 12 months ago sold one of his assets for $1 billion. We're also a club that makes more money than the majority of clubs. He can afford to run this club but his stupid decisions have cost him a fortune and now he's choosing not to spend more than he has to while we survive. It seems to me that he is running this club the exact same way he ran the Cleveland Browns,eg downhill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P3te Posted September 26, 2013 Share Posted September 26, 2013 We're also a club that makes more money than the majority of clubs. Sadly, we also spend a lot more than the majority of them too, and we haven't even getting any value for a lot of that expenditure Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AvfcTheObsession Posted September 26, 2013 Share Posted September 26, 2013 How rich is Tony Fernandez at QPR? Would he be a step forward if Lerner did look to sell? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted September 26, 2013 Share Posted September 26, 2013 How rich is Tony Fernandez at QPR? Would he be a step forward if Lerner did look to sell? Tony Fernandes is a worst chairman than Lerner. He has wasted so much money on QPR in short space of time that its nearly criminal. got a big ego as well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts