The Randy Lerner thread

[suttonpaul]

I'd rather he kept the £20m and dropped his asking price for the club in order to speed up his own exit.

The money won't be coming from his pocket I'm sure

I don't think much has over the years despite what people believe.

When we were bleeding money he did. But according to the club we're not any more, so I would take from that his monetary input isnt needed as much any more

The majority of the money he put in was loan or in exchange for equity, the money loaned is being repaid and has in the past been subject to management fees and interest (low level and not always waved) I believe.

As and when he sells the club I don't expect in real terms he will have put much if any of his money in.

Not that that is wrong in any way, but I think there is a misconception with him that he has been some kind of generous benefactor to the club and I don't think that view stacks up personally.

For him not to lose money he needs to sell for 250m or more. He will lose money.

[Amo69]

He probably has lost money but it almost seems that we talk about him funding everything. Surely Aston Villa football club as an ever present Premier League team is capable of generating revenue.

How did we cope all those years without Lerner?

[kevangrealish]

This person may have a clue as to what RL has been playing at in regards to the club recently...if we could get a hold of him.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JeJpQlGW_GA

[blandy]

The majority of the money he put in was loan or in exchange for equity, the money loaned is being repaid and has in the past been subject to management fees and interest (low level and not always waved) I believe.

As and when he sells the club I don't expect in real terms he will have put much if any of his money in.

Not that that is wrong in any way, but I think there is a misconception with him that he has been some kind of generous benefactor to the club and I don't think that view stacks up personally.

For him not to lose money he needs to sell for 250m or more. He will lose money.

Obviously there's different ways of looking at things, but for me I agree - I don't think he'll get his money back. Which is his hard cheese, and his risk. He's a grown man.

On the "generosity" aspect, you could also look at it two ways - either yes, he's been generous - he's (part) funded the club from his own pockets, as well as from loans at the Libor rate, or thereabouts - this being essentially the same as an inter-bank lending rate - no major profit is made by the Lerner Trust from the loans, but equally they do get some small return on the loan.

Then there's interest waived - and that far outstrips the one off 7 million management fee he charged about 3 or 4 years ago. He's not taken money out in wages (as Ellis did) and he's paid off losses as well as loan interest via conversion to equity.

You could say much of that last part is down to running the club badly, as opposed to generosity, or you could say he didn't have to do it, so it's "generous". Take your pick.

We'll only have a chance of knowing if he gets his money back, when/if the club is sold, and even then we may not get to know the price.

But either way, overall, to date he has put multi multi millions into the club, which he stands to lose some of. He may make a profit, I suppose, though no one really thinks that's likely.

It'll have been an expensive venture for him, but when he's gone from the club, there will be elements of his time that last as long as the ground. He'll have left a mark that's still there long after the past few seasons results, players and managers are just faded memories.

The thing that I find most perplexing is working out exactly what he's got out of it all - not in finance one way or the other, but what sense of enjoyment/satisfaction/involvement/education/whatever.

Will he ask himself "why the hell did I do that?" or will he say "Yeah, that was good, for the memories and the fun" - I hope it's the latter, but suspect it's a bit of both.

He seems to me like a good guy, with good ideals and standards, but not always the wisdom.

[Amo69]

This person may have a clue as to what RL has been playing at in regards to the club recently...if we could get a hold of him.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JeJpQlGW_GA

Crazy guy.

A quick look of the comments and the Americans are going mad at him neglecting the Browns. Someone has mentioned how they sound like Villa fans under Doug.

All the warning signs were there after all.

[TRO]

 

 

The majority of the money he put in was loan or in exchange for equity, the money loaned is being repaid and has in the past been subject to management fees and interest (low level and not always waved) I believe.

As and when he sells the club I don't expect in real terms he will have put much if any of his money in.

Not that that is wrong in any way, but I think there is a misconception with him that he has been some kind of generous benefactor to the club and I don't think that view stacks up personally.

For him not to lose money he needs to sell for 250m or more. He will lose money.

 

Obviously there's different ways of looking at things, but for me I agree - I don't think he'll get his money back. Which is his hard cheese, and his risk. He's a grown man.

On the "generosity" aspect, you could also look at it two ways - either yes, he's been generous - he's (part) funded the club from his own pockets, as well as from loans at the Libor rate, or thereabouts - this being essentially the same as an inter-bank lending rate - no major profit is made by the Lerner Trust from the loans, but equally they do get some small return on the loan.

Then there's interest waived - and that far outstrips the one off 7 million management fee he charged about 3 or 4 years ago. He's not taken money out in wages (as Ellis did) and he's paid off losses as well as loan interest via conversion to equity.

You could say much of that last part is down to running the club badly, as opposed to generosity, or you could say he didn't have to do it, so it's "generous". Take your pick.

We'll only have a chance of knowing if he gets his money back, when/if the club is sold, and even then we may not get to know the price.

But either way, overall, to date he has put multi multi millions into the club, which he stands to lose some of. He may make a profit, I suppose, though no one really thinks that's likely.

It'll have been an expensive venture for him, but when he's gone from the club, there will be elements of his time that last as long as the ground. He'll have left a mark that's still there long after the past few seasons results, players and managers are just faded memories.

The thing that I find most perplexing is working out exactly what he's got out of it all - not in finance one way or the other, but what sense of enjoyment/satisfaction/involvement/education/whatever.

Will he ask himself "why the hell did I do that?" or will he say "Yeah, that was good, for the memories and the fun" - I hope it's the latter, but suspect it's a bit of both.

He seems to me like a good guy, with good ideals and standards, but not always the wisdom.

 

 I feel much the same as you, about it all.

 I guess the tattoo will last a bit too....just don't quite dig it at all really, I have my theories as we all do, but none of us really know.

I just hope one day with all the hidden agenda's and stoney silences and keeping ones own council are are truly buried a little bit of honesty can surface and for all those that are interested he might want to get it off his chest.

 

maybe wishful thinking.

[TRO]

I guess sometimes the most irrelevant things can be a source of irritation....The state of the Holte pub used to p**s me off before i even got in to the ground under HDE....a total embarrassment

 

So for me, he did tidy up a bit.

 

now the embarrassment is just confined to the pitch....just joking

 

onward and upward.

[bannedfromHandV]

Damned if he does make a statement damned if he doesn't.

[Amo69]

Damned if he does make a statement damned if he doesn't.

Maybe it's because nobody likes him.

[TrentVilla]

Damned if he does make a statement damned if he doesn't.

 

Price you pay I guess for making such a damn mess of things.

[markavfc40]

He seems to me like a good guy, with good ideals and standards, but not always the wisdom.

 

 

Pete I didn't want to cram up the thread by quoting the whole of your post but much of what you say I agree with. In terms of your last sentence I would like to believe he is a good guy and have no reason to believe he isn't and in terms of his ideals and standards I'd agree that his heart seems to be in the right place and for the most part he always seemed to respect the great history of our club and showed respect to those that had contributed to it.

I also agree that he lacked wisdom but he was/is in a position to help himself in this regard. He is running a multi million pound business with an income of around 100 mill a year yet in terms of at board level he never seems to have surrounded himself with people who could help with the knowledge he clearly lacked. Had he have brought in a David Dein or even kept someone like Steve Stride on board things could have turned out a lot different.

As I have said previously in this thread I think he gambled that his initial investment of around a 70-80 mill net spend over the first four seasons would be enough to secure Champions League football and we could go from there. The reality is though that combined with a wage bill that was never more then the sixth highest in the league was never realistically going to be enough to overall one of Chelsea, Man Utd, Arsenal and Liverpool and stave off the developing force of Man City and to a lesser extent Spurs. Perhaps with an exceptional manager and some nous in the boardroom it may have been enough. Unfortunately though we never had an exceptional manager and we never had any nous at board level.

Edited July 7, 2014 by markavfc40

[Dr_Pangloss]

Lerner operates like a true trust fund baby. Useless.

[briny_ear]

 

Will he ask himself "why the hell did I do that?" or will he say "Yeah, that was good, for the memories and the fun" - I hope it's the latter, but suspect it's a bit of both.

 

Have to say that his recent statements suggest it's mainly "why the hell did I do that?".

[maqroll]

At least he's not embellishing his statements with platitudes and PR fluff, which is a refreshing change after all that bullshit.

[Richard]

This person may have a clue as to what RL has been playing at in regards to the club recently...if we could get a hold of him. http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JeJpQlGW_GA

I actually felt sick

[Villarocker]

What surprises me about Lerner is the fact that he survived the "LERNER OUT" banners and will leave of his own accord, despite the fact he oversaw some of the worst results and performances in our history.

Lerner is very lucky to have bought the club at a time when Ellis was majority shareholder. Otherwise, he'd have suffered the indignity of large protests against him at Villa Park.

Edited July 8, 2014 by villarocker

[lexicon]

What surprises me about Lerner is the fact that he survived the "LERNER OUT" banners and will leave of his own accord, despite the fact he oversaw some of the worst results and performances in our history.

Lerner is very lucky to have bought the club at a time when Ellis was majority shareholder. Otherwise, he'd have suffered the indignity of large protests against him at Villa Park.

 

Well anything could happen in hypothetical land, couldn't it? 

[Villarocker]

What surprises me about Lerner is the fact that he survived the "LERNER OUT" banners and will leave of his own accord, despite the fact he oversaw some of the worst results and performances in our history.

Lerner is very lucky to have bought the club at a time when Ellis was majority shareholder. Otherwise, he'd have suffered the indignity of large protests against him at Villa Park.

 

Well anything could happen in hypothetical land, couldn't it?

Care to elaborate?

[lexicon]

 

 

What surprises me about Lerner is the fact that he survived the "LERNER OUT" banners and will leave of his own accord, despite the fact he oversaw some of the worst results and performances in our history.

Lerner is very lucky to have bought the club at a time when Ellis was majority shareholder. Otherwise, he'd have suffered the indignity of large protests against him at Villa Park.

 

Well anything could happen in hypothetical land, couldn't it?

Care to elaborate?

 

 

"Lerner is very lucky to have bought the club at a time when Ellis was majority shareholder. Otherwise, he'd have suffered the indignity of large protests against him at Villa Park."

[Villarocker]

What surprises me about Lerner is the fact that he survived the "LERNER OUT" banners and will leave of his own accord, despite the fact he oversaw some of the worst results and performances in our history.

Lerner is very lucky to have bought the club at a time when Ellis was majority shareholder. Otherwise, he'd have suffered the indignity of large protests against him at Villa Park.

 

Well anything could happen in hypothetical land, couldn't it?

Care to elaborate?

 

"Lerner is very lucky to have bought the club at a time when Ellis was majority shareholder. Otherwise, he'd have suffered the indignity of large protests against him at Villa Park."

Nothing hypothetical about that statement. It is a matter of fact.