The Randy Lerner thread

[andyjsg]

You say this -

suprised it's that many, but please read context of previous posts, my point is we aren't getting enough money in to buy the players that the fans want. Attendances need to rise and prices need to go up for us to compete, simple economics.

I can't be bothered to go through explaining it again for the 15th time as it falls on deaf ears.

And yet you completely ignored this -

They show as 36k but maybe that's all comps. Again we have one of the cheapest tickets too, so not making the sums that say many London clubs are making.

Talk of attendances is a nonsense in cash terms anyway.

If you had a 60,000 stadium with a flat rate of £50 a ticket, that would give you £3m per home game (if you assume that catering / programme sales offset other costs such as power, staff etc).

Over the course of a Premier League season you'd generate £57m in gate receipts. Or Suarez and Andy Carroll (at the time) without signing on fees, agents fees or wages.

Kit deals are generally minimal. At c. £3.5m per year we're far ahead of where we could be for a club with our level of success. That kit deal covers Gabby's wages.

Shirt sponsor? Where are we at with that? £1m a year? That's Weimann paid for then.

TV money is where it's at, and even then you can't genuinely compete based off that alone. You need massive investment from outside, and then the success that comes with it helps to generate cash for the future. I believe that's what Randy aimed to do when he bought the club.

But if Lerner genuinely thought he could throw £100m or so at player transfers and then sit back and watch us be self-sufficient in the Champions League he was at best naïve and at worst stupid.

Let's give it one last shot of perspective. If the stadium held 100,000 people and tickets were a flat £50, we'd generate £95m in gate receipts per season. Manchester City spent more than that on players this summer alone.

I didn't ignore it, I think we would need to be selling out at a higher ticket price to get to where we could buy top players. My point is without it or a sugar daddy I can't see how it will happen. My argument was people complaining about Lerner and I was trying to explain how it is different for the likes of spurs, 60 million a year different.

[Ulver]

As if we'd be planning to build a new North Stand and increase capacity.

 

There's a reason our attendances and commercial income are down Randy ... THE PRODUCT IS SECOND RATE. We don't need extra seats, we need a team on the pitch that people want to pay to watch week in week out

 

If you don't get that correct the other things will never be right either. It's not hard to work out

[GENTLEMAN]

I disagree.

The club already offer reduced prices in terms of combination deals for certain games. Hospitality is also often discounted, in order to fill out the numbers, and the facilities in the Trinity Road stand are up there with the best the Premier League.

The club has spare seating and hospitality capacity, so there is no case for North Stand development. I suspect that, given that the media appear to be trying to propogate a story, someone has just dug up the past 'commitment' regarding the North Stand. 

 

There was plans for redevelopment a few years back which were shelved by Lerner, so I am guessing they expected attendances to grow faster with the initial investment put into the club. Or maybe Lerner wanted to do something aesthetic and there was no monetary reasoning behind the plans. Who knows?

 

As you have said, it is probably a rehash of an old story to justify Lerner's denial.

[suttonpaul]

For all we know he is going to invest bigger and the plans for the north stand to go ahead if real are to house all these fans that want to sit in our stadium at 50 quid a pop watching champions league football lol

 

It's all conjecture.

 

What are we debating?

[GENTLEMAN]

What are we debating?

 

BS 

[useless]

If we believe the latest denials are just a smokescreen then who's to say that Houllier's denial regarding Red Bull isn't part of the same cover-up, as part of the process they also get to gauge fans reaction to the possibility of stadium name change.

[The Fun Factory]

As much as I would like Villa Park to have a swanky new North Stand, which would make it without doubt one of the best grounds in the country, there is really no demand for it at present. One day perhaps- but we need investment and progression on the pitch first.

[GENTLEMAN]

If we believe the latest denials are just a smokescreen then who's to say that Houllier's denial regarding Red Bull isn't part of the same cover-up, as part of the process they also get to gauge fans reaction to the possibility of stadium name change.

Interesting theory.

[suttonpaul]

if we are putting theories out mine is absolutely nothing is going on, the papers made up some stuff and Randy isn't looking to sell. The transfer budget will be 15-20m in the summer as usual and Lambert will spend it on 2 or 3 players.

[GENTLEMAN]

if we are putting theories out mine is absolutely nothing is going on, the papers made up some stuff and Randy isn't looking to sell. The transfer budget will be 15-20m in the summer as usual and Lambert will spend it on 2 or 3 players.

I hope so.

[TRO]

Keep going around in circles here so I think I'm out as whatever is said people want to just lay the blame on Lerner and whilst I agree some of the decisions were not good in hindsight (MON money) or at all (McLeash). I think fans should consider their part or at least understand that unless prices go up and attendances improve (along with general attitude) that things won't change unless this mystical sugar daddy turns up or we get lucky with purchases (ala Benteke).

I think people need a dose of reality!!

 

Would you say Graham Taylor & Ron Saunders got lucky with purchases or do we give them a bit of talent spotting credit.

 

We always seem lucky when we sign good.....and unlucky when we sign bad. There is more to it than JUST luck for me......over recent years i think we have just bought the wrong players in the main.

 

There is an element  of luck granted, but the most talented ( scouts)in the game seem to have a major effect on their teams status.

 

its a structure....proper scouting network with talented spotters and sufficient numbers a manager who can trust them and make the right choices and an owner that can trust them all and provide sufficient funds.

 

its more than one that needs to be right.

Edited February 3, 2014 by TRO

[KSV]

I'm happy with randy if he gives Paul 20-25m plus sales in the summer. When we get rid of bent given Hutton etc we may see a few better calibre players come in as well. He must support Lambert with at least 10m next January. New TV deals would have well and trully taken affect by then. If he cant then he has to go

Edited February 3, 2014 by KSV

[AshVilla]

15 - 20 mill won't be enough especially if we sell Benteke

[useless]

It seems like we are always saying that we'll spend in the next window but it never happens. I think we'll just continue as is regarding spending policy, don't think Randy would spend big just to finish a few places up the league. Maybe 20 million would get us a little closer to the likes of Southampton and Newcastle. 

[TRO]

I don't think Benteke is going to be the money spinner we all once thought.

[suttonpaul]

Ash I meant net spend 15-20m just like he has averaged throughout his ownership, why people think he wont allow the same next summer all of a sudden is a mystery to me.

 

As a note to KSV what does it matter what is allowed in the January afterwards? Budgets are given yearly or in our case season by season.

[suttonpaul]

TRO he has 3 in 3 now so the beast may be back, I'm not so sure he doesn't look unplayable like he did this time last year. If he finds form between now and may + has a good world cup a money spinner he will be if he doesn't he will be here next year I think.

[KSV]

Ash I meant net spend 15-20m just like he has averaged throughout his ownership, why people think he wont allow the same next summer all of a sudden is a mystery to me.

 

As a note to KSV what does it matter what is allowed in the January afterwards? Budgets are given yearly or in our case season by season.

if our manager has injuries or requires a certain player like this January he wanted an AM. Hr hasn't been backed.

[Butterfingers]

Not sure why anyone would be concerned that a potential buyer would want to continue to pay the loans off in instalments. It makes perfect business sense to do so, freeing up further cash to be invested in the squad.

 

Perhaps people still cling to the hope that we'll be the next Man City-They're in for a dissapointment

 

An owner who can support the going rate in wages is what we need. Without this, we will continue to see the kind of signings we made this summer

[ismail-villa]

Seen on the SSN app that the daily mirror reporting that Lerner isn't looking to sell, but is instead looking for fund-raising ideas to help the club.