The Randy Lerner thread

[Harry]

I remember reading somewhere he took £7million for himself in "management fees" during MON's last season alone. I'd love to know what work these "management fees" involved....

How about couple of hundred million pounds that his family trusts have pumped into Villa. I think we have to look at the broader picture. You can't cherry pick individual figures.

[Harry]

In his 6 years does anyone know how much interest on loans and management charges he's paid himself ? I'm sure 1 year alone was in excess of £15m

Don't forget that the funds coming to the club have come from his family trusts and I very much doubt he could borrow interest free from such a trust and added to that what's the alternative...a bank? Hardly clear smart thinking.

[Morley_crosses_to_Withe]

What bollocks - I, like the majority, reasonably assumed that RL and his CEO had understanding and control of the finances. It is only now "unsustainable" because RL has decided that it is - if he decided to spend at the same level as he did under MON (not as I'm suggesting he will or should), he could do for a good few more years yet

It's neither possible or feasible for supporters to question whether a billionaire's investment in a club is sustainable.

RL seems to have decided that Villa will (hopefully) become a mid-table club - that's a tricky balance to maintain. Normally when finance is withdrawn clubs slip down the table and out of the division

I'm sure Randy did know whether it was sustainable, but what he didn't seem to predict was a financial meltdown, the introduction of restrictive financial rules in football (which are even now affecting Man City), a costly divorce, and a total failure in the 'build it and they will come' approach (unfortunately, they didn't predict that our global appeal is limited, and that any slight increase in ticket prices/merchandise/pies would be met by resistance from a bunch of whinging Brummies).

What I DO think he should have accounted for is a failure for us to make Champions League football; the club's spending was totally geared towards making this, but it seems that no thought was given to 'what if?'. It was a gamble and it failed.

I think there was a) too much trust placed in MON and b ) a huge dose of Yankee hubris that Champions League football was a certainty within the planned time scale.

I also don't think Randy expected to end up with a load of over-priced, over paid shite on his books that the he couldn't shift no matter how hard he tried.

Edited January 3, 2013 by Morley_crosses_to_Withe

[Fuse]

My summary of Randy Lerner's time at Villa.

Good

• Invested heavily in transfer fees and backed all the managers
  
• Bodymoor Heath refurb
  
• Improved faciltiies for fans and improved customer service
  
• Raised profile of club with marketing deals - Nike, Genting
  
• Gave us some pride bakc in the club after years of stagnation
  
• Infrastructire of club is far better than it ever was under Doug
  

Bad

• Employing Paul Faulkner as CEO - completely out of his depth
  
• Non-communication with fans - never publicly addressed fans or stated ambiton, strategy
  
• Pulled the plug on MON investment at wrong time - should have done it earlier
  
• Should have paid the £7m compensation needed for David Moyes when he had the chance after MON left
  
• NEVER EVER should have appointed McLeish
  
• Never ever listen to purple nose Ferguson!
  
• Players recruited - god we have bought soem shite!
  

Indifferent

• Selling Young, Milner and Downing - all wanted to leave but were not replaced properly - again down to bad management choices
  
• Cutting the Wage Bill too quickly
  
• Macron Shirt Deal - the kit is shit IMO
  
• Still don;t know what his ambitions are and if he is here for the long haul - uncertainty
  

I think he will back Lambert in January and if we dont spend properly I think it will be down to an arrogant, complacent Manager rather than Lerner not giving him the funds needed.

[Big_John_10]

Randy is putting money in and running the club [insert personal view here]

Don't know how anyone could not put a negative in the blank.

We are worse than when he took over.

Imagine a manager got the job and years later the team were in a worse position. No one could argue they'd done a good job.

[pacbuddies]

Don't know how anyone could not put a negative in the blank.

We are worse than when he took over.

Imagine a manager got the job and years later the team were in a worse position. No one could argue they'd done a good job.

I think Lerner's heart is in the right place (or at least it was) but his financial and business acumen when it comes to owning sporting clubs is very questionable.

[Big_John_10]

Unfortunately in the world of professional sports good intentions just isn't enough.

[spiezels]

Don't know how anyone could not put a negative in the blank.

We are worse than when he took over.

Imagine a manager got the job and years later the team were in a worse position. No one could argue they'd done a good job.

Ownership is a long term thing though. Ok we aren't better off now than when he took over but we were better off for 3 seasons under MON. You're choosing this season selectively.

In 3,5,10 years we maybe better off than when he took over but what's your cut off point of his success overall.

In 3 years we might be better, in 5 we may be worse in 10 we may be better, you can't just look at this current season or the last couple.

You'd be niave to think that once he took over we'd just get better and better every year forever.

Stupid argument.

Edited January 3, 2013 by spiezels

[Ironsid]

I'm definitely looking at this year in total isolation because that's where we are. I haven't got a crystal ball so I don't know where we will be in 1,5 or 10 years time. This year concerns me because this season will determine where we are playing next season. Mr Lerner has undoubtedly invested heavily in the past and hopefully sees the need to continue with sensible investment. On the pitch I can't see a significant improvement.

[Big_John_10]

I'm picking our current moment. Why on earth would i pick a moment 3 years ago to says he's done a good job.

That's a stupid argument.

In 3 years time could we say he's done a good job? Yes things may change. But again it would be stupid argument to judge him on what may happen.

Right now, at this point, we are worse off than when he came in as an owner. So right now at this point I can't see how it can be argued he's done a good job.

How is that a stupid argument?

[Papillon]

I'm picking our current moment. Why on earth would i pick a moment 3 years ago to says he's done a good job.

That's a stupid argument.

In 3 years time could we say he's done a good job? Yes things may change. But again it would be stupid argument to judge him on what may happen.

Right now, at this point, we are worse off than when he came in as an owner. So right now at this point I can't see how it can be argued he's done a good job.

How is that a stupid argument?

All things being the same, yes, but they aren't. Multiple owners have come into the Premier League, most clubs are owned by foreign tycoons of some kind. If Doug was still in charge with his tight purse I suspect we would have been down a long time ago. Even Reading, Stoke, Sunderland, QPR etc have backing from "rich" investors nowadays, they didn't five years ago.

[Big_John_10]

Other teams having money doesn't change the fact we are in a worse position as a club now than when he took over.

The decision making of Lerner is a major reason why that is.

The way other clubs have been run is irrelevant.

[blandy]

Other teams having money doesn't change the fact we are in a worse position as a club now than when he took over.

The way other clubs have been run is irrelevant.

That's arguable to say the very least. We're in a worse position, presumably because of lower league position (at least in part) compared to our opponents....who are run in particular ways. And their league position is a function of their wealth, decisions on managers, who to sell and buy and so on. Everything is relative to how others are doing, in football. If no one else had any money, either, then we'd be more competitive with them, as their best players would be off to Spain or Germany or wherever, and they'd be weaker.

In terms of "our" finances. The money Randy has put in of his own pocket, is his loss, not the clubs. The money borrowed from the RL trust fund is the Club's debt, and it's definitely much larger than under Ellis. However under Ellis while the debt was less, we were nevertheless totally skint and unable to get money to finish the training ground, we were running at a loss that no-one would fund.

Now we're running, or were running at a loss that Randy has funded (from his own pocket and from loans). So we have liquidity, where before we had none.

He's changed the policy to stop us running at a loss, as he's no longer able to keep funding perpetual losses from his pocket. But I'd argue that the club isn't actually worse now than it was under the last bloke. It's not much better, right now, but it has a even or better chance of getting back to being much better.

Yes he's made some blunders, for sure. The biggest loser from that is himself. Us fans may not like it, or results, but really we're just currently seeing a struggling team, same as under Ellis. The rest is not our problem, as long as the club isn't in danger of going out of business. And it's not (touches wood).

[Ironsid]

In case my post has been misconstrued, I broadly agree with Big John. Sorry if I appeared stupid.

[Villarocker]

I don't think there's a doubt that we are in a worse position now than when he took over. Just look at how much debt he's gotten us in to!

[DelboyVilla]

Top post Blandy, explains the situation very simply.

IMO we are in the same position as under Herbert in terms of competitiveness on the pitch. Which to me given the opportunities that we have had is a real travesty.

As others have stated I don't think Randy has hurt anyone except himself, the club cannot go bust in the current position unless we lose our Premier League status??

Would Herbert have done better with the same funds Randy has access to? Definately Yes!

[darrenm]

There are loads of contradictory opinions I'm having trouble with but the main one is:

How can Randy be accused of spending too much money and putting the club in debt, but also be guilty of not spending enough money to make us successful?

Obviously there are some people who claim one side and vice versa, but there are genuinely some posters essentially criticising him for both in the same post. It's almost as if people can't form their own opinions and just post anything to criticise for the sake of it.

[villa_chemist]

Randy came in after his family had sold MBNA and had a load of cash. At the time you could reckon that 100 million could get you close to Champions League. BUT...

Banking sector collapsed (I would assume that a fair amount of Randy's fortune was in banking shares considering his background, so diminished his wealth, AND...

Oil millions distorted the market. The Man City effect distorted the market in the Premier League meaning that you need 200 million to get CL.

[DelboyVilla]

Randy came in after his family had sold MBNA and had a load of cash. At the time you could reckon that 100 million could get you close to Champions League. BUT...

Banking sector collapsed (I would assume that a fair amount of Randy's fortune was in banking shares considering his background, so diminished his wealth, AND...

Oil millions distorted the market. The Man City effect distorted the market in the Premier League meaning that you need 200 million to get CL.

That last statement is wrong as Spurs attained CL without spending oil billions or in fact spending as much as we did! The attained CL by keeping their better players until they wanted to sell, by having a great business plan and employing the right managers at the right times. Remember Man City have got stronger but Liverpool, Arsenal and to a certain extent Chelsea have got weaker over the past few years. It is no longer the sky4 group year in, year out. We had our chance and blew it. MON reached his glass ceiling of 6th we should have replaced him then with a top 4 calibre manager. Instead we cut his legs off overnight and let him drop us in it and replaced him with an out dated obstanate old fool who physically was not up to the job. Then we put in the worst manager I have seen at Villa Park. Then we bring in a young bright but inexperienced rising star and hope we can survive using academy players as the backbone of the side. Total lunacy, no plan A, certainly no plan B and the way they deal with things is having a CEO who makes embarassing statements.

Randy do what HDE did (eventually!!) annonce the club is for sale at the right price and see who comes to the table, there are still a lot of rich people in this world. If there's no one decent then take it back off the market until the time is right. Lets be sensible though we have to stay in this league, some wise buys can do that, give the manager the money he needs and trust his judgement, he has been good on buys so far.

[Richard]

No it wasn't, at all.

A valid response, then as now might have been "actively seek new investment /ownership [if you're not willing/able/capable to put any money in]"

thats the same as saying "sell to someone who can"