useless Posted February 6, 2015 Share Posted February 6, 2015 (edited) Have I missed something? Did Lerner say he's not looking to sell now? He's not "actively" looking to sell is what tom fox said. I haven't seen that Fox has said Lerner's not " actively " looking to sell ". I've seen the Lerner's ' not a motivated seller' line. Which to me is just a way of telling us that the club is still for sale, but said in a way so that it doesn't look like he's desperate to get rid of us. Edited February 6, 2015 by useless Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted February 6, 2015 Share Posted February 6, 2015 the Cleveland Browns went 24 quarters without a touchdown a few years back, so im sure he is ok with the lack of goals Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante_Lockhart Posted February 6, 2015 Share Posted February 6, 2015 At least the Browns could get points on the board with field goals. We have to settle with shut-outs lately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nazvfc Posted February 6, 2015 Share Posted February 6, 2015 At least the Browns could get points on the board with field goals. We have to settle with shut-outs lately. Seeing as we are deemed crap - shouldn't that be shit-outs?? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maqroll Posted February 6, 2015 Share Posted February 6, 2015 At least the Browns could get points on the board with field goals. We have to settle with shut-outs lately. Seeing as we are deemed crap - shouldn't that be shit-outs?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Villan4Life Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 Oliver Kay of The Telegraph has wrote an article regarding Lerner but unfortunately it's subscription to The Telegraph online only. https://twitter.com/TimesSport/status/563981763324555265/photo/1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Walmley_Villa Posted February 7, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted February 7, 2015 Here you go Smart guy, Randy Lerner. In 2006, he bought an underperforming company whose annual revenue was £49 million. It is still underperforming, but now it generates more than £100 million a year – and this before an imminent new Premier League broadcast deal which, on its own, is likely to be worth upwards of £70 million a year for a club like Lerner’s Aston Villa, just as long as they stay up. What has Lerner done to turn this historic football club, from England’s second city, into a financial success story? Remarkably little, actually. He spent heavily for the first four years and then spent another four years wishing he had not. It has cost him a lot of money to take Villa full circle, to the Premier League’s glass ceiling and back, but, by restoring them to their pre-takeover state — stable and self-sufficient but depressed, tired and severely in dire need of reinvigoration — he has seen his asset triple in value. From 2006-07 to 2009-10, spending heavily and chasing the dream under Martin O’Neill, Villa finished tenth (50 points) sixth (60 points), sixth (62 points) and sixth (64 points). From 2010/11 onwards, in post-O’Neill austerity, it has been ninth (48 points), 16th (38 points), 15th (41 points) and 15th (38 points). In the past three-and-a-half seasons, two-and-a-half of them under Paul Lambert, they have won 32 out of 138 Premier League matches, which is less than one in four, and have scored 134 goals, which is, on average, less than one per game. Pitiful records, both. The financial picture has improved, but these are dismal times for Villa, who, with 11 goals in 23 matches so far, are in danger of setting a new record for the fewest goals scored in a Premier League season. More seriously they are haunted once more by the spectre of relegation – ever-present, it has felt, since ambition followed O’Neill out of the door. Attendances held up for a while, but their average for league matches has dropped from 40,029 in 2007-08 to 36,080 last season and now to 32,922 — nearly 10,000 empty seats, on average, which is alarming at a time when Leicester City, Stoke City and West Bromwich Albion are filling their admittedly smaller grounds on a regular basis. For as long as they can continue to avoid relegation, though, even if it continues to be by small margins, Villa will be in the money. According to the Deloitte Money League, they had the 22nd highest revenue in world football in 2013-14. By 2016-17, when the new television deal arrives, they should climb higher, quite feasibly beyond Atletico Madrid or Inter Milan. In other words, it is boom time in English football, even for those clubs where austerity reigns. While Everton, Southampton, Swansea City, West Ham United and others attempt to be creative and dynamic in their efforts to break — or at very least touch — the glass ceiling, Villa, like Newcastle United under Mike Ashley’s cold, unfeeling ownership, seem almost to have given up. It is a worry, a debate that extends far beyond whether Lambert is the right manager to take the club forward. A financial chasm separates Everton, Villa and Newcastle from the top six now. Everton still have the will, if not necessarily the means, to try to bridge that gap, or at least to try to give their supporters something to cheer about (less easy this season, it must be said), but in Villa’s case the gulf in resources seems to be equalled by a deficit of ambition and belief. Certainly, compared with clubs of comparable size and resources, Villa have made worryingly few waves in the transfer market. Villa have spent £53 million in transfer fees in two-and-a-half years under Lambert’s management, but this covers 26 players, of which only Christian Benteke cost more than £5 million. Villa’s recruitment record, based around free transfers and low-price deals from the Football League or from the less glamorous European leagues, has tended to reinforce that there are not many bargains to be found in bargain basement. So what will a huge new broadcast deal mean for Villa? A slight raising of the bar in terms of transfer and wage policy? This would be welcome, but the bar will be raised similarly by Southampton, Swansea and West Ham, three clubs who have seemed shrewder than Villa, as well as more ambitious, in recent years. For Villa to become one of the world’s top 20 richest clubs might sound good, but, in terms of on-pitch competitiveness, it will mean little if they cannot outspend Swansea. Lerner stated last summer that he wished to sell Villa. There was some interest, but not for the initial £200 million sum he was looking for as he seeks a return on his investment. Even if a buyer is found, though, how much money would it take to re-establish Villa as a top-eight club? How much more, beyond that, would it take to re-establish them in the top six? And how realistic is that now that spending will be curbed under the new financial regulations? The concern would be that, with the Champions League bringing such huge disparity, widened over the past five or six years by the commercial explosion at those clubs (including City and Chelsea) who now have the biggest global profile, and now with financial regulation biting, ossification has taken place at the very time that Villa and indeed Newcastle have settled for life among the also-rans. The outlook is worse still, of course, at those Sky Bet Championship clubs for whom life aboard the Premier League gravy train in the 1990s did not come with the long-term guarantees they thought. Leeds United are now in their 11th consecutive season without Premier League football, Sheffield Wednesday their 15th, Nottingham Forest their 16th. They will find it is a different world if and when they finally claw their way back to the big time. Inequality is everywhere in football’s new financial landscape — so much so that the Premier League’s collective approach to broadcast revenue is a model for others, such as Spain, to follow, however grudgingly and half-heartedly. Even the team that finishes bottom of the Premier League will earn more in broadcast revenue than all 18 clubs in the Dutch Eredivisie combined. Is that healthy for the Premier League? Is it good for English football if proud, historic clubs, under wealthy ownership, are content to tread water in order simply to collect their money? Over the past four-and-a-half years, Villa’s has seemed a sorry, joyless existence. Their supporters will live in hope that there are better days ahead, but, even if they emerge from this malaise, they might find their horizons are not nearly so broad as they looked before. 13 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Villarocker Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 Have I missed something? Did Lerner say he's not looking to sell now? He's not "actively" looking to sell is what tom fox said. I haven't seen that Fox has said Lerner's not " actively " looking to sell ". I've seen the Lerner's ' not a motivated seller' line. Which to me is just a way of telling us that the club is still for sale, but said in a way so that it doesn't look like he's desperate to get rid of us. I read it like this: Randy still wants out of dodge but he's not willing to lower the asking price at the moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AntrimBlack Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 Not a lot wrong with that article. Does not tell us anything we did not already know, but puts it in a nice little bundle. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AntrimBlack Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 Have I missed something? Did Lerner say he's not looking to sell now? He's not "actively" looking to sell is what tom fox said. I haven't seen that Fox has said Lerner's not " actively " looking to sell ". I've seen the Lerner's ' not a motivated seller' line. Which to me is just a way of telling us that the club is still for sale, but said in a way so that it doesn't look like he's desperate to get rid of us. I read it like this: Randy still wants out of dodge but he's not willing to lower the asking price at the moment. ``Not a motivated seller'' just means Lerner is not actively chasing buyers, but will sell if a buyer comes along with an acceptable offer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AntrimBlack Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 And that article possibly illustrates what Lerner's strategy is at the moment. Stay clear of relegation with minimum spend. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
useless Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 The only part that's really important, is that Fox has said that he's a seller. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 I'm glad the media are starting to give the manager and owner the attention they both deserve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 (edited) Here you go Smart guy, Randy Lerner. In 2006, he bought an underperforming company whose annual revenue was £49 million. It is still underperforming, but now it generates more than £100 million a year – and this before an imminent new Premier League broadcast deal which, on its own, is likely to be worth upwards of £70 million a year for a club like Lerner’s Aston Villa, just as long as they stay up. What has Lerner done to turn this historic football club, from England’s second city, into a financial success story? Remarkably little, actually. He spent heavily for the first four years and then spent another four years wishing he had not. It has cost him a lot of money to take Villa full circle, to the Premier League’s glass ceiling and back, but, by restoring them to their pre-takeover state — stable and self-sufficient but depressed, tired and severely in dire need of reinvigoration — he has seen his asset triple in value. From 2006-07 to 2009-10, spending heavily and chasing the dream under Martin O’Neill, Villa finished tenth (50 points) sixth (60 points), sixth (62 points) and sixth (64 points). From 2010/11 onwards, in post-O’Neill austerity, it has been ninth (48 points), 16th (38 points), 15th (41 points) and 15th (38 points). In the past three-and-a-half seasons, two-and-a-half of them under Paul Lambert, they have won 32 out of 138 Premier League matches, which is less than one in four, and have scored 134 goals, which is, on average, less than one per game. Pitiful records, both. The financial picture has improved, but these are dismal times for Villa, who, with 11 goals in 23 matches so far, are in danger of setting a new record for the fewest goals scored in a Premier League season. More seriously they are haunted once more by the spectre of relegation – ever-present, it has felt, since ambition followed O’Neill out of the door. Attendances held up for a while, but their average for league matches has dropped from 40,029 in 2007-08 to 36,080 last season and now to 32,922 — nearly 10,000 empty seats, on average, which is alarming at a time when Leicester City, Stoke City and West Bromwich Albion are filling their admittedly smaller grounds on a regular basis. For as long as they can continue to avoid relegation, though, even if it continues to be by small margins, Villa will be in the money. According to the Deloitte Money League, they had the 22nd highest revenue in world football in 2013-14. By 2016-17, when the new television deal arrives, they should climb higher, quite feasibly beyond Atletico Madrid or Inter Milan. In other words, it is boom time in English football, even for those clubs where austerity reigns. While Everton, Southampton, Swansea City, West Ham United and others attempt to be creative and dynamic in their efforts to break — or at very least touch — the glass ceiling, Villa, like Newcastle United under Mike Ashley’s cold, unfeeling ownership, seem almost to have given up. It is a worry, a debate that extends far beyond whether Lambert is the right manager to take the club forward. A financial chasm separates Everton, Villa and Newcastle from the top six now. Everton still have the will, if not necessarily the means, to try to bridge that gap, or at least to try to give their supporters something to cheer about (less easy this season, it must be said), but in Villa’s case the gulf in resources seems to be equalled by a deficit of ambition and belief. Certainly, compared with clubs of comparable size and resources, Villa have made worryingly few waves in the transfer market. Villa have spent £53 million in transfer fees in two-and-a-half years under Lambert’s management, but this covers 26 players, of which only Christian Benteke cost more than £5 million. Villa’s recruitment record, based around free transfers and low-price deals from the Football League or from the less glamorous European leagues, has tended to reinforce that there are not many bargains to be found in bargain basement. So what will a huge new broadcast deal mean for Villa? A slight raising of the bar in terms of transfer and wage policy? This would be welcome, but the bar will be raised similarly by Southampton, Swansea and West Ham, three clubs who have seemed shrewder than Villa, as well as more ambitious, in recent years. For Villa to become one of the world’s top 20 richest clubs might sound good, but, in terms of on-pitch competitiveness, it will mean little if they cannot outspend Swansea. Lerner stated last summer that he wished to sell Villa. There was some interest, but not for the initial £200 million sum he was looking for as he seeks a return on his investment. Even if a buyer is found, though, how much money would it take to re-establish Villa as a top-eight club? How much more, beyond that, would it take to re-establish them in the top six? And how realistic is that now that spending will be curbed under the new financial regulations? The concern would be that, with the Champions League bringing such huge disparity, widened over the past five or six years by the commercial explosion at those clubs (including City and Chelsea) who now have the biggest global profile, and now with financial regulation biting, ossification has taken place at the very time that Villa and indeed Newcastle have settled for life among the also-rans. The outlook is worse still, of course, at those Sky Bet Championship clubs for whom life aboard the Premier League gravy train in the 1990s did not come with the long-term guarantees they thought. Leeds United are now in their 11th consecutive season without Premier League football, Sheffield Wednesday their 15th, Nottingham Forest their 16th. They will find it is a different world if and when they finally claw their way back to the big time. Inequality is everywhere in football’s new financial landscape — so much so that the Premier League’s collective approach to broadcast revenue is a model for others, such as Spain, to follow, however grudgingly and half-heartedly. Even the team that finishes bottom of the Premier League will earn more in broadcast revenue than all 18 clubs in the Dutch Eredivisie combined. Is that healthy for the Premier League? Is it good for English football if proud, historic clubs, under wealthy ownership, are content to tread water in order simply to collect their money? Over the past four-and-a-half years, Villa’s has seemed a sorry, joyless existence. Their supporters will live in hope that there are better days ahead, but, even if they emerge from this malaise, they might find their horizons are not nearly so broad as they looked before. I am simply not in a position to argue with any of that, as I am not really Interested in the financial performance of the club....However, I thought your post was very well presented and interesteing I am not about to write folly that funds don't matter, they do and more today than ever....having said that they always to some degree have been an issue for managers of yesteryear.....Villa themselves was in the pound seats at the turn of the century buying up all the best players nationally. Ron Saunders made a fist of restricted funds and so did others. My worry still comes back to the manager. Question ....If, (and i am not saying the lack of spending does affect us) the manager feels his ability to manage is predominately being restricted by lack of funds, why is he so defensive of the owner, surely that flys in the face of his own reputation, defending the owner by his silence? Question... Why has the majority of the managers signings despite them being modest purchases, gone in to reverse in terms of their development and effectiveness on the pitch? Question... Why, when so many fans think that the managers signings have been good in relationship to their costs, have the performances/results been so poor? Question....At a time when football appeal is at its best and media revenue is on the rise, why would he want to sell the club? and futhermore why has he not had suitors banging his door to relieve him of the revenue. I have no doubt in my mind that your comments are valid, I just think that an important part of the playing side of things is a major component. Edited February 7, 2015 by TRO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 (edited) I am not about to write folly that funds don't matter, they do and more today than ever....having said that they always to some degree have been an issue for managers of yesteryear.....Villa themselves was in the pound seats at the turn of the century buying up all the best players nationally. Ron Saunders made a fist of restricted funds and so did others. quick note but this is a completely different era, if we had same system as today back then bigger funded teams would have took Cowans or Withe by offering them a lot more money Edited February 7, 2015 by Zatman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 (edited) I am not about to write folly that funds don't matter, they do and more today than ever....having said that they always to some degree have been an issue for managers of yesteryear.....Villa themselves was in the pound seats at the turn of the century buying up all the best players nationally. Ron Saunders made a fist of restricted funds and so did others. quick note but this is a completely different era, if we had same system as today back then bigger funded teams would have took Cowans or Withe by offering them a lot more money Every era is different, but some similarities still remain the same Arsenal, Liverpool,Man Utd, Ipswich were all prominent in that time....If players know something is being built, they are more likely to hang around. I accept that times have changed and money has become MORE of attraction than ever...But I also subscribe to the fact that you have to make the best of what you have. Managers earn the right to make the job easier for themselves and Jose Mourino is a perfect example wins the Euro cup with Porto on modest funds earns his spurs/ raises his profile and then says right I'm going to make life easier for myself....The guy has proved himself with & without funds...he has earned that right. Some managers just want the doe without proving they can spend it and in some cases without earning the right to. Edited February 7, 2015 by TRO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Villan4Life Posted February 8, 2015 Share Posted February 8, 2015 (edited) Knocked £5 off tickets for West Brom (home match) Edited February 8, 2015 by Villan4Life Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliffy Biro Posted February 8, 2015 Share Posted February 8, 2015 I'm glad the media are starting to give the manager and owner the attention they both deserve. Won't really matter for a few reasons. It wont last and it wont matter to Lerner what the press think of the shambles he has presided over. The person who has put the most pressure on Lambert since he arrived here was Mourinho yesterday. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Villarocker Posted February 8, 2015 Share Posted February 8, 2015 Knocked £5 off tickets for West Brom (home match) Desperation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoelVilla Posted February 8, 2015 Share Posted February 8, 2015 That makes me wanna compare Villa to a Tom Petty-song. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts