The Randy Lerner thread

[Ingram85]

You quoted the wrong post and all that shows is there are 11 hypocrites.

So he quoted the wrong post, big deal. He's still correct though. Oh and the view from my high horse is spectacular, you're very small and quiet from up here 

Edited May 5, 2014 by Ingram85

[srsmithusa]

I don't hate the man and find the distasteful personal insults truly truly pathetic and more of a sad low life reflection of the posters making them rather than lerner but while I thank him for his time, it is time to go. He's had good times & bad times and while im sure he has tried, best intentions will only get you so far in a game all about £££££'s.

I think he realised he couldn't give what was needed and has gotten us (riskily) into a sellable position and will step aside.

I wish things had worked out differently here for us and for him after those bright promises at the start of the new dawn that wasn't to be. A shame. I wish him all the best as a person but kind of glad he has the sense to move aside.

Very very true!!

Haha yeah I bet you two have never said a bad word about anyone at any point in your lives. How's the view up there on those high horses?

BJ. Off your meds? You liked this post at the top of the page and then Rip it later. There's drugs for that rapid cycling thing, at least there are here in the states.

I liked it because it was so bad.

I think one of us misunderstands the use of the like button....

[misanthrope]

 

 

Or he recklessly spent in the first 4 years and then spent the next four years trying to claw it all back because mr plating introduced rules saying that he had to?

Yeah that's why he did it.

 

 

you have evidence to the contrary? 

 

as I've said before the goalposts have moved dramatically since randy bought us, both in terms of city and the FFP rules, don't see why you find it so hard to see why he might have lost interest or why you have so much vitriol for him, think a few people on here are in for a surprise if  /when we do get a new richer owner and we don't suddenly start buying a squad of £20m+ players

 

 

You should really stop believing hearsay that FFP is going to wildly impact anything. It's scaremongering at best and has succeeded only at giving reluctant owners across all levels of the game a great excuse not to invest. You were probably one of the people on these boards claiming city were unsustainable and would come unstuck a couple of years back. Here we are 3 years later and they are about to win their second title, spent about 100m on strikers alone last summer and broke FFP rules which will probably result in them getting fined 20 grand and move along. The impact from domestic rules will be similar. Denying large clubs their TV rights to european games is about as likely as interstellar travel within 10 years.

 

Most people are realising it was all a shocking idea to begin with seeing as how it's only the larger more established clubs that will benefit, solidifying positions in their respective leagues thereby preventing any chance for a club to have any significant rise through the ranks. It's bad for football, there were better ways to stop clubs borrowing irresponsibly and putting their club at risk of oblivion.

[nazvfc]

 

 

 

Or he recklessly spent in the first 4 years and then spent the next four years trying to claw it all back because mr plating introduced rules saying that he had to?

Yeah that's why he did it.

 

 

you have evidence to the contrary? 

 

as I've said before the goalposts have moved dramatically since randy bought us, both in terms of city and the FFP rules, don't see why you find it so hard to see why he might have lost interest or why you have so much vitriol for him, think a few people on here are in for a surprise if  /when we do get a new richer owner and we don't suddenly start buying a squad of £20m+ players

 

 

You should really stop believing hearsay that FFP is going to wildly impact anything. It's scaremongering at best and has succeeded only at giving reluctant owners across all levels of the game a great excuse not to invest. You were probably one of the people on these boards claiming city were unsustainable and would come unstuck a couple of years back. Here we are 3 years later and they are about to win their second title, spent about 100m on strikers alone last summer and broke FFP rules which will probably result in them getting fined 20 grand and move along. The impact from domestic rules will be similar. Denying large clubs their TV rights to european games is about as likely as interstellar travel within 10 years.

 

Most people are realising it was all a shocking idea to begin with seeing as how it's only the larger more established clubs that will benefit, solidifying positions in their respective leagues thereby preventing any chance for a club to have any significant rise through the ranks. It's bad for football, there were better ways to stop clubs borrowing irresponsibly and putting their club at risk of oblivion.

 

Well Man City have been fined 50million quid and had their CL squad reduced to 21 - they have to accept that or go before a panel who will decide if that and any further punishment is warranted - 50million to Man City is peanuts but to others (like Villa) is **** huge!! b

[Davkaus]

Well Man City have been fined 50million quid and had their CL squad reduced to 21 - they have to accept that or go before a panel who will decide if that and any further punishment is warranted - 50million to Man City is peanuts but to others (like Villa) is **** huge!! b

 

 

 

 

 

But it's UEFA who have handed out the punishment. We aren't in any UEFA competitions, and look like we won't be for quite some time, so using FFP as a reason for the cut back on spending doesn't add up. The FA FFP rules are far more liberal.

Edited May 6, 2014 by Davkaus

[srsmithusa]

 

Well Man City have been fined 50million quid and had their CL squad reduced to 21 - they have to accept that or go before a panel who will decide if that and any further punishment is warranted - 50million to Man City is peanuts but to others (like Villa) is **** huge!! b

 

 

 

 

 

But it's UEFA who have handed out the punishment. We aren't in any UEFA competitions, and look like we won't be for quite some time, so using FFP as a reason for the cut back on spending doesn't add up. The FA FFP rules are far more liberal.

 

 

Maybe you just proved that lerner has UEFA ambitions in his plan? 

[suttonpaul]

As FFP is back on the agenda.......

 

My view is that following Man City are apparently going to get limited by how many players they can register for the champions league to 18 or 21 instead of 25 and also get a fine of between 40 and 60m.

 

These are very serious consequences!

 

However the fine doesn't go on the companies books so it doesn't show for the next FFP test, and they aren't banned from Europe so they can still get their TV revenue.

 

So what does this tell us? Well a lot and not a lot.

 

A lot, that we know what they are throwing at clubs when they are throwing the book at them, the size of fines involved and it gives parameters of what to expect if you break the rules to that extent.

 

Not a lot, when you consider who gets that money? What happens if it happens to be a Leeds scenario and they can't afford to pay it? What happens if you break the rules again?

 

Which begs the question........... Is this all legal?

 

Is it legal to limit investment in playing costs? Is it legal to limit wages via total wages at a club? Is it legal via UK or EU law? Is it likely that the clubs will appeal these sanctions?

 

Yes is the answer to the last one and don't know is the answer to the rest of them.

 

 

So where does this leave us?

 

Well that depends on our owner. If it is Lerner then we are fine, we are a break even whilst we have these current wages whilst spending 20m a year on players but that will only last a few years. New players bring new wages and once that 200k ish from the bomb squad has gone off the books to keep us balanced we will have to take into account the players wages we are signing from the next years budget. This leaves us needing our stadium to be sponsored to hold that off for a couple of years and we see where we are at that point to see how to move forward.

 

We will be probably much better off from where we are now.

 

 

If it is a new owner and he happens to throw Abramovic money around then we will need to all become mini lawyers to understand what is going on with all this UEFA FFP stuff.

 

As a last personal point it's interesting to think about FFP and why it is around. We can be cynical to say its to close shop on the elite group of clubs that currently exist but I don't believe that.

 

I think it is to get clubs to break even and curb players wages so that the financial side of football can brought back under some sort of control and clubs will continue to 'always' exist in the future and not do a Leeds or Portsmouth.

 

I think however this could have been done better. If an Abramovic figure wants to invest in a club like what has happened at Chelsea or City then good on them and let them.

 

However no debt can be put on the club and the owner must fund everything over break even by injecting equity into the club so that is all debt problems sorted and with regards to wages a rule could have been put into place saying anything over 70% of turnover for example would have to be guaranteed by that owner for the length of the current players contracts in some sort of bond with the FA.

 

 

Just my two pence.

Edited May 6, 2014 by suttonpaul

[briggsy]

I think however this could have been done better. If an Abramovic figure wants to invest in a club like what has happened at Chelsea or City then good on them and let them.

However no debt can be put on the club and the owner must fund everything over break even by injecting equity into the club so that is all debt problems sorted and with regards to wages a rule could have been put into place saying anything over 70% of turnover for example would have to be guaranteed by that owner for the length of the current players contracts in some sort of bond with the FA.

I havent agreed with a lot of your posts regarding FFP over the last few months but this is spot on

I think everyone agrees that something had to be done to prevent whats happened to Portsmouth and Leeds happening again but UEFA didnt go the right way about doing it

[villa4europe]

 

 

 

Or he recklessly spent in the first 4 years and then spent the next four years trying to claw it all back because mr plating introduced rules saying that he had to?

Yeah that's why he did it.

 

 

you have evidence to the contrary? 

 

as I've said before the goalposts have moved dramatically since randy bought us, both in terms of city and the FFP rules, don't see why you find it so hard to see why he might have lost interest or why you have so much vitriol for him, think a few people on here are in for a surprise if  /when we do get a new richer owner and we don't suddenly start buying a squad of £20m+ players

 

 

You should really stop believing hearsay that FFP is going to wildly impact anything. It's scaremongering at best and has succeeded only at giving reluctant owners across all levels of the game a great excuse not to invest. You were probably one of the people on these boards claiming city were unsustainable and would come unstuck a couple of years back. Here we are 3 years later and they are about to win their second title, spent about 100m on strikers alone last summer and broke FFP rules which will probably result in them getting fined 20 grand and move along. The impact from domestic rules will be similar. Denying large clubs their TV rights to european games is about as likely as interstellar travel within 10 years.

 

Most people are realising it was all a shocking idea to begin with seeing as how it's only the larger more established clubs that will benefit, solidifying positions in their respective leagues thereby preventing any chance for a club to have any significant rise through the ranks. It's bad for football, there were better ways to stop clubs borrowing irresponsibly and putting their club at risk of oblivion.

 

 

well it does wildly impact a club if they decide to try and stick to the rules, which by the looks of it we have

 

completely wrong about my opinion on city, he's not going anywhere, huge advert for the middle east, would be interesting to see a comparison between their investment in city and the increase in size of etihad airways and tourism to the area, but seeing as flights are up by 25% a year and they make $6bn a year the money is going nowhere (and thats just etihad, not the oil money or any other of the companies that the group have their fingers in) what theya re doing with the academy and the whole area outside the ground will eventually get them round UEFA's rules too, not just the FFP but potentially the rules over the signing of young players, its all very clever

 

the bit in bold is why i was and will defend lerner, im of the opinion that he's one of those who thinks its a shocking idea, hence why we voted against it

[suttonpaul]

Man City are going to challenge the judgement according to the Telegraph tonight however apparently they are the only one of the nine clubs sanctions will be imposed upon are willing to challenge it.

 

Says the other 8 are taking UEFA's rule as gospel and don't think they can win......?

[Mendi]

Lerner no longer in love with villa.

[ThunderPower_14]

Man City are going to challenge the judgement according to the Telegraph tonight however apparently they are the only one of the nine clubs sanctions will be imposed upon are willing to challenge it.

 

Says the other 8 are taking UEFA's rule as gospel and don't think they can win......?

 

The other 9 clubs are probably benefitting more from the ruling than Man City than they are.

 

Big clubs that don't have the bottomless pit of money City do are probably really happy with the rule, because it keeps them well ahead of their domestic rivals. They can't spend unlimitedly, but they can spend a lot more than the clubs lower down and they're happy that way.

 

Man City have that bottomless pit of money and basically don't care what other clubs spend because they can match it, so it's in their interest to challenge the ruling and challenge FFP.

 

I hope they win.

[Shaw_nuff]

 

Man City are going to challenge the judgement according to the Telegraph tonight however apparently they are the only one of the nine clubs sanctions will be imposed upon are willing to challenge it.

 

Says the other 8 are taking UEFA's rule as gospel and don't think they can win......?

 

The other 9 clubs are probably benefitting more from the ruling than Man City than they are.

 

Big clubs that don't have the bottomless pit of money City do are probably really happy with the rule, because it keeps them well ahead of their domestic rivals. They can't spend unlimitedly, but they can spend a lot more than the clubs lower down and they're happy that way.

 

Man City have that bottomless pit of money and basically don't care what other clubs spend because they can match it, so it's in their interest to challenge the ruling and challenge FFP.

 

I hope they win.

 

Why?

[PussEKatt]

If Man $ity appeal it will go to a law court, not a sports court, so the outcome could be far far worse. 

[suttonpaul]

If Man $ity appeal it will go to a law court, not a sports court, so the outcome could be far far worse.

It goes to a sports court for the appeal

[villa4europe]

just thinking about my comment from Lambert's post match conference in the Lambert thread - 

 

"He'll decide. It's a bit different . . but I respect him"

 

a bit different? what does that mean?!

Edited May 7, 2014 by villa4europe

[Villarocker]

Sutton Paul you made some good points about FFP. I was only saying yesterday how it seemed illegal to forbid a business from running in its own way. I cannot imagine this being enforced and allowed. If it is, I will be very surprised.

[suttonpaul]

We'll Quinn was saying on sky today that when it was voted for it was about debt NOT about losses.

If it is likely to be illegal why are 8 of the 9 clubs rolling over on this? Confuses me it's become a legal thing now

[CrackpotForeigner]

If UEFA can't even impose a meaningful punishment on Man City, these FFP rules aren't worth a J Arthur Rank.

[Mendi]

LERNER OUT