vandaq Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 He is not gonna show up one single time is he? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmytheirishvillain Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 Why doesn't lerner go out and get a multi million pound deal to change the name of villa park. That might seem unpopular with a lot of people but why not? Who cares if we would be going to Singapore airlines park or virgin airlines park to the Nike arena or Facebook park wouldn't attempting a bumper deal for villa park like city and arsenal did be the way forward? With the new spending restrictions that come into place I predict more misery on us all especially been relegated this year and losing the tv money we might actually never come back Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted February 8, 2013 Share Posted February 8, 2013 Why doesn't lerner go out and get a multi million pound deal to change the name of villa park. That might seem unpopular with a lot of people but why not? Who cares if we would be going to Singapore airlines park or virgin airlines park to the Nike arena or Facebook park wouldn't attempting a bumper deal for villa park like city and arsenal did be the way forward? With the new spending restrictions that come into place I predict more misery on us all especially been relegated this year and losing the tv money we might actually never come back what is the point of more money.....when we don't know how to spend it. With one or two exceptions like Benteke.... we have proved that we can't spend money wisely. Its NOUS that is missing not money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost Posted February 8, 2013 Share Posted February 8, 2013 (edited) Its NOUS that is missing not money. To be fair, it's probably both. Edited February 8, 2013 by Ghost Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmytheirishvillain Posted February 8, 2013 Share Posted February 8, 2013 But with the new spending restrictions that villa voted against might I add we need to find a way of raising multi millions of pounds so we can compete again. I'm starting to realise now maybe Lerner is right about the wage bill but went about it all wrong they first thing he needs to do is sack Faulkner the man is useless hasn't got a clue about football, next he needs to employ football people like a director of football ( I always wondered why he didn't move houllier to director of football instead of paying him off and letting him go). When we go down this season, along with our wage bill, cost cutting for championship, new restrictions and fans that will stop going to matches because we got relegated and the new tv deal money that well miss out on we might never come back to the prem league,we will have years of misery ahead worse than the last few BELEIVE me so he needs to do something drastic like negotiating a big deal for stadium sponsorship Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PussEKatt Posted February 9, 2013 Share Posted February 9, 2013 Why doesn't lerner go out and get a multi million pound deal to change the name of villa park. That might seem unpopular with a lot of people but why not? Who cares if we would be going to Singapore airlines park or virgin airlines park to the Nike arena or Facebook park wouldn't attempting a bumper deal for villa park like city and arsenal did be the way forward? With the new spending restrictions that come into place I predict more misery on us all especially been relegated this year and losing the tv money we might actually never come back We don't need that sort of money to buy players from the lower divisions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troglodyte Posted February 9, 2013 VT Supporter Share Posted February 9, 2013 I don't think anybody is going to be giving us the money that Manchester City and Arsenal receive for their stadium naming rights any time soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coda Posted February 9, 2013 Share Posted February 9, 2013 I don't think anybody is going to be giving us the money that Manchester City and Arsenal receive for their stadium naming rights any time soon. Arsenal's £8m a year looks poor next to Citeh's £40m a year. Uefa had no problem with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROTTERDAM1982 Posted February 9, 2013 Share Posted February 9, 2013 After the vote on Thurs, i am now convinced he is trying to sell up.It adds up, reducing costs, making it more attractive, keeping options open. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Papillon Posted February 9, 2013 Share Posted February 9, 2013 After the vote on Thurs, i am now convinced he is trying to sell up.It adds up, reducing costs, making it more attractive, keeping options open. How does that make any economical sense? Making us more attractive through reducing costs? What about relegating and having a piss-poor squad making huge investment necessary, losing big endorsements whilst on it and substantially reducing revenue for the club. And also; the new owner would have to sustain the challenge of a year in the Championship, the "lost" league nobody cares about compared to the Formula 1 that is the Premier League. In business it is successful companies that are most likely to be acquired, because the setup is in place for the new owner(s) to consolidate and invest further. A flithy rich investor wouldn't care if we had a 50% or 85% wage to revenue-ratio, because the numbers are nominally small compared to what it takes to challenge the big dogs when coming from behind. Reducing costs to make us more attactive, does not make sense to me. In fact, if we got new owners putting huge emphasis on that I wouldn't think those owners were good for us. An investor wanting to throw big money on us should/would care little about wages in the amount of 50M or 75M each year on the books. I don't want to change ownership just for the sake of it, when we know what can happen with crap owners like Shinawatra or the Venky's. People like that come in promising everything, and then bugger off when things change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Papillon Posted February 9, 2013 Share Posted February 9, 2013 Thats from a fans point of view but I think Woody may be alluding to how much he sold it for, if his aim was make money then he has. As for the Villa only time will tell to whether he manages to make money from it. True...his father bought the Browns for about $530m, and Randy sold the club for about $1b....doesn't take much business skill to sell an NFL team, but that's a tidy profit anyway you look at it. What about alternative cost? An investor with any kind of nous would not invest $500M in sports and regard is the best investment available. I doubt his wealth managers at Goldman Sachs or Morgan Stanley states this kind of investment in their top 100 bracket. To say Lerner purchased AVFC to make money in the end (as the only goal) is plain naive and ignorant. He purchased us because he wanted to own a team and make us powerful, thus get more appreciation for his money spent, unlike when you invest in a company and see stock prices deliver capital gains on a computer screen or in the New York Times. Call it his toy or whatever, but he wanted to make us compete but realized he was throwing money at a lost cause when Man City, Liverpool and Tottenham started to do the same and make it impossible for us to compete without spending money few people on this planet could really envisage. That's life, it is not a human right for every team to play in the Champions League, we are not Liverpool or Arsenal, who could beg to differ on that argument. Clubs just don't change owners all the time, just look at Everton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROTTERDAM1982 Posted February 9, 2013 Share Posted February 9, 2013 Low cost base. Turnover £100m, wage bill this season, £50m? max. Allows £30/40m leeway, plus allowed losses of £100m over 3 years for an opportunity for a wealthy individual/organization to "have a go". Just my thoughts, and some expert on TS anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danceoftheshamen Posted February 9, 2013 Share Posted February 9, 2013 I don't quite get what Randy is trying to achieve here? I mean what is the plan? Selling all the good players year on year? Decimating the clubs wage bill? One thing is a touch odd about it all. What exactly is he trying to achieve? Surely the point of a football club is to try to win things? The whole thing becomes rather pointless otherwise & yet it appears we simply operate to exist as alsorans or something? How wimpish! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstonMartin82 Posted February 9, 2013 Share Posted February 9, 2013 He's almost certainly cutting his losses. He's slimming it down to try and make it more attractive for another buyer. The only thing that he can do now to save some face around VP is to do what Doug did. Sell it to someone else who has the clubs best interests at heart but is a better business person. We are doing exactly what Leeds did... but to a lesser extent. I'd have loved to have been in the boardroom during the meeting where Randy told everyone the direction we were now heading in. It would have been shortly before the General walked out of here. Lerner = Ridsdale Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gompedyret Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 Every time I try to analyze and get a grip of the situation I kind of spin around ending up at the same place I started, which is simply "Piss off, Lerner". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P3te Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 Lerner = Ridsdale he's nothing like ridsdale, and we're nothing like leeds. we'd have been like them had we not started to curtail the spending when we did, however Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maqroll Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 Thats from a fans point of view but I think Woody may be alluding to how much he sold it for, if his aim was make money then he has. As for the Villa only time will tell to whether he manages to make money from it. True...his father bought the Browns for about $530m, and Randy sold the club for about $1b....doesn't take much business skill to sell an NFL team, but that's a tidy profit anyway you look at it. What about alternative cost? An investor with any kind of nous would not invest $500M in sports and regard is the best investment available. I doubt his wealth managers at Goldman Sachs or Morgan Stanley states this kind of investment in their top 100 bracket. To say Lerner purchased AVFC to make money in the end (as the only goal) is plain naive and ignorant. He purchased us because he wanted to own a team and make us powerful, thus get more appreciation for his money spent, unlike when you invest in a company and see stock prices deliver capital gains on a computer screen or in the New York Times. Call it his toy or whatever, but he wanted to make us compete but realized he was throwing money at a lost cause when Man City, Liverpool and Tottenham started to do the same and make it impossible for us to compete without spending money few people on this planet could really envisage. That's life, it is not a human right for every team to play in the Champions League, we are not Liverpool or Arsenal, who could beg to differ on that argument. Clubs just don't change owners all the time, just look at Everton. I agree with everything you just said, but have no idea how it relates to my earlier post that you've quoted... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maqroll Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 Where did I read that Lerner is basically disliked by a majority of Villa staff? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P3te Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 Where did I read that Lerner is basically disliked by a majority of Villa staff? here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HolteEndRob Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 ^^^ If that is true then can you blame them! A lot of staff would find themselves unemployed if we go down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts