Risso Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 Sorry, but I just don't buy Lerner as the "pantomime villian" most of you paint him as. What I see is an owner that: - Has backed his managers Backed Martin O'Neill to an extent that we're now insolvent, and the cash he's putting in now is just to meet the day to day costs of the club. That isn't the mark of a good manager, i's the mark of a fool being parted from his money. - Has invested in the club (pub, training grounds) That's rearranging deckchairs on the Titanic. A new pub? Who gives a stuff. - Has improved the corporate governance of the club (proper board, for example) Absolute bollocks, a proper board my arse. There's Lerner himself, who has proved himself utterly incompetent at sports management, his mate the ex-customer services manager Faulkner, Russell the FD who has overseen the worst losses in the club's history, and a daft old sod with a dodgy keyboard who doesn't realise that he hasn't resigned as a non-exec yet. That's as far from being an example of good corporate governance as it's possible to get. - Has taken a back seat, rather than seek publicity Why is this a good thing? He doesn't have to court the spotlight to provide some sort of leadership. We're a rudderless ship at the moment. He's completely disinterested and nowhere to be seen. - Has pride in the history of the club and in the fans A few free scarves and a mosaic is the sort of frippery that's nice when you've sorted out the basics. I think he has utter contempt for the fans personally. All of which are miles ahead of our last owner. At least Doug still shows up for games, and delivered a lot more than this arsehole ever has/will. However, I can admit that he has also made mistakes: - Giving MON too much control - Appointing McLeish Many will see the appointment of Houllier as a mistake - I see it more as a risk since he had a known heart condition. At the very least, he (arguably) tried to get us playing better football. So do these mistakes make him a bad owner? Nope. He's only a bad owner if he doesn't admit nor learn from his mistakes. Whether he appoints a new manager or not at season end and who that replacement is will be a better indicator of his ability as an owner. There's no sign of him learning from his mistakes though. We've been in rapid decline for two years, and it shows no signs of ending. I dread to think who he'd appoint next if he did get rid of McFuck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Djemba_Villan Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 Sorry, but I just don't buy Lerner as the "pantomime villian" most of you paint him as. What I see is an owner that: - Has backed his managers - Has invested in the club (pub, training grounds) - Has improved the corporate governance of the club (proper board, for example) - Has taken a back seat, rather than seek publicity - Has pride in the history of the club and in the fans All of which are miles ahead of our last owner. However, I can admit that he has also made mistakes: - Giving MON too much control - Appointing McLeish Many will see the appointment of Houllier as a mistake - I see it more as a risk since he had a known heart condition. At the very least, he (arguably) tried to get us playing better football. So do these mistakes make him a bad owner? Nope. He's only a bad owner if he doesn't admit nor learn from his mistakes. Whether he appoints a new manager or not at season end and who that replacement is will be a better indicator of his ability as an owner. Thank you so much for restoring my faith that there is an iota of rationale amongst fellow Villa fans. Couldn't agree more, I feel physicaly sick when I hear some fans make some kneejerk direct link between results on the pitch at any one given moment in time and a chairman's contribution. I feel sorry for the guy, he's been almost perfect as an owner, yes - he made some mistakes, but all the positive points cant just be forgotten. If I were in his shoes I'd think "sod it" If I heard some fans' attitude quite frankly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanky Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 when I hear some fans make some kneejerk direct link between results on the pitch at any one given moment in time and a chairman's contribution. This would be all well and good if most of us were in support of McLeish when he signed and then started to do badly. However, everyone knew what McLeish was like and would bring except Lerner and the board it seems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 I feel sorry for the guy, he's been almost perfect as an owner, yes - he made some mistakes, but all the positive points cant just be forgotten. If I were in his shoes I'd think "sod it" If I heard some fans' attitude quite frankly. And he hasn't thought 'sod it'? And if he hasn't, how would his actions be any different? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 He bought the club after our worst season in the prem. 6 years later and millions and millions of pounds spent he is the owner of a team who will produce a season even worse. And there are people who will try and defend that? Mind blowing. Learnt from his mistakes? Hiring Mcleish after houllier isn't learning. Sticking with Mcleish after our worst ever premiership season isn't learning. Look at the browns. A future of being a nothing team. The only thing Lerner can produce as a sports team owner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SikhInTrinity Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 The most disappointing thing from Randy is his turnout to watch AVFC this season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 Sorry, but I just don't buy Lerner as the "pantomime villian" most of you paint him as. What I see is an owner that: - Has backed his managers Backed Martin O'Neill to an extent that we're now insolvent, and the cash he's putting in now is just to meet the day to day costs of the club. That isn't the mark of a good manager, i's the mark of a fool being parted from his money. - Has invested in the club (pub, training grounds) That's rearranging deckchairs on the Titanic. A new pub? Who gives a stuff. - Has improved the corporate governance of the club (proper board, for example) Absolute bollocks, a proper board my arse. There's Lerner himself, who has proved himself utterly incompetent at sports management, his mate the ex-customer services manager Faulkner, Russell the FD who has overseen the worst losses in the club's history, and a daft old sod with a dodgy keyboard who doesn't realise that he hasn't resigned as a non-exec yet. That's as far from being an example of good corporate governance as it's possible to get. - Has taken a back seat, rather than seek publicity Why is this a good thing? He doesn't have to court the spotlight to provide some sort of leadership. We're a rudderless ship at the moment. He's completely disinterested and nowhere to be seen. - Has pride in the history of the club and in the fans A few free scarves and a mosaic is the sort of frippery that's nice when you've sorted out the basics. I think he has utter contempt for the fans personally. All of which are miles ahead of our last owner. At least Doug still shows up for games, and delivered a lot more than this arsehole ever has/will. However, I can admit that he has also made mistakes: - Giving MON too much control - Appointing McLeish Many will see the appointment of Houllier as a mistake - I see it more as a risk since he had a known heart condition. At the very least, he (arguably) tried to get us playing better football. So do these mistakes make him a bad owner? Nope. He's only a bad owner if he doesn't admit nor learn from his mistakes. Whether he appoints a new manager or not at season end and who that replacement is will be a better indicator of his ability as an owner. There's no sign of him learning from his mistakes though. We've been in rapid decline for two years, and it shows no signs of ending. I dread to think who he'd appoint next if he did get rid of McFuck. Great post which I completely agree with. I just can't believe there are fans who still support him. I'm sure Randy is a very decent bloke and I'm sure he has not done this deliberately but the simple empirically proven fact is that he is a very poor owner of 'sports franchises'. When we are relegated and under the current manager that is a certainty, next season if not this, he will have lost probably in the region of £150m of his family's money in Aston Villa. That also makes him a very poor businessman. I used to defend him but you cannot defend the indefensible. As for changes to the fabric of the ground, all his changes have been cosmetic and to be honest I'd rather watch decent football and see us win games in the Villa Park of the 1970's than the current dire football in a ground with excellent corporate hospitality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b6bloke Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 I used to defend Lerner, He does the the club, the history etc but that does not make him good at it! He has had some good ideas but they get outweighed by the bad ones! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CI Posted April 17, 2012 Author Share Posted April 17, 2012 I can forgive him for the GED appointment but not the McLeish one It was stubborn and a resolute V sign to the fans He may aswell have just put "**** YOU" in big letters on the OS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PussEKatt Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 I read a post somewhere on this forum that said that Lerner does not mind the cost of transfers, he is more concerned with getting wages down.In other words he is saying we can buy anyone we want,just keep the wage bill down. If that is the case then it is just a big con ! So we could buy, Rooney or C.Ronaldo or even L.Messi as long as we keep the wages down.So how many top shelf players are going to come here for 20k a week ?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daweii Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 I personally think we'll be going for a tiered system.. Back up players will be on £20-£30k a week, First team players £40-£50k a week and Key players £60k+.. We need to lower the wages of those that don't play much at all, some of the players we don't play are being paid about the same as someone that plays all season. If we lower those wages and remove some of the more overpaid MON signings we'd be able to afford a few £80k+ signings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MMFy Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 I wonder if Randy has considered the cost of sacking an underperforming manager against the cost of relegation? Sacking McSpazhole now would not cost too much, given he has failed to get anywhere near his publicised performance targets. Relegation is going to cost him around £30m.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coda Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 That's the hope I'm clinging on to. He could see Houllier wasn't working so backed him heavily in January. Surely he can see that, if we survive, we're going to be even worse next season under McLeish. Lerner has to realise that an approx. £4m+ payoff to McLeish and his cronies is a good investment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smetrov Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 I read a post somewhere on this forum that said that Lerner does not mind the cost of transfers, he is more concerned with getting wages down.In other words he is saying we can buy anyone we want,just keep the wage bill down. If that is the case then it is just a big con ! So we could buy, Rooney or C.Ronaldo or even L.Messi as long as we keep the wages down.So how many top shelf players are going to come here for 20k a week ?! Its Very similar to what Ellis tried pull in the latter years. Basically we would bid for a player - knowing full well that he would reject terms on offer - but the fact that we bid got many people excited. Wages and fees are the same thing - currency. A player on free with wages of 4m over 4 years costs £4m - and 2m fee but on wages of £2m would still cost us the same. - All a smokescreen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CI Posted April 17, 2012 Author Share Posted April 17, 2012 I personally think we'll be going for a tiered system.. Back up players will be on £20-£30k a week, First team players £40-£50k a week and Key players £60k+.. We need to lower the wages of those that don't play much at all, some of the players we don't play are being paid about the same as someone that plays all season. If we lower those wages and remove some of the more overpaid MON signings we'd be able to afford a few £80k+ signings. Totally disagree with the numbers Back up players will be on 5k a week We have the likes of Bannan Baker Clark Lichaj Gardner all first teamers now all on less than 10-15k a week The times are a changing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozvillafan Posted April 17, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted April 17, 2012 Backed Martin O'Neill to an extent that we're now insolvent, and the cash he's putting in now is just to meet the day to day costs of the club. That isn't the mark of a good manager, i's the mark of a fool being parted from his money. See my section on "mistakes". Nevertheless, he has backed O'Neill. He has backed Houllier. He has backed McLeish. He has reined in the wage bill since MON left. How you can still spin all that into a negative is beyond me. That's rearranging deckchairs on the Titanic. A new pub? Who gives a stuff. Ignored the training ground bit, did we? Absolute bollocks, a proper board my arse. There's Lerner himself, who has proved himself utterly incompetent at sports management, his mate the ex-customer services manager Faulkner, Russell the FD who has overseen the worst losses in the club's history, and a daft old sod with a dodgy keyboard who doesn't realise that he hasn't resigned as a non-exec yet. That's as far from being an example of good corporate governance as it's possible to get. Perhaps you prefer the Ellis method? Regardless of what you think of the people placed in positions, its structure is an improvement and a sign of a proper owner. Why is this a good thing? He doesn't have to court the spotlight to provide some sort of leadership. We're a rudderless ship at the moment. He's completely disinterested and nowhere to be seen. See above. The club can now run without a megalomaniac owner needing to see over every part of the business. That's a good thing (and a refreshing change) A few free scarves and a mosaic is the sort of frippery that's nice when you've sorted out the basics. I think he has utter contempt for the fans personally. If he didn't give a hoot about the fans and our history, he would have done nothing. At least Doug still shows up for games, and delivered a lot more than this arsehole ever has/will. I wonder if you would have felt the same in '83 when Doug took over. Or after 6 years of Doug's reign. Yet you are able to ascertain that Doug has done more than Randy ever will? There's no sign of him learning from his mistakes though. We've been in rapid decline for two years, and it shows no signs of ending. I dread to think who he'd appoint next if he did get rid of McFuck. I disagree. Reining in the wage bill is a sign that he has learnt from the MON experience. Signing Houllier was a risk - but not a mistake. It was the start of the culling process and, football wise, a step in the right direction. The signing of McLeish is a mistake, one that can still be rectified before next season begins. I'll give him till then to get it right before passing judgement on whether he learns from his mistakes or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacketspuds Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 Oh Randy, you bought us and started re-shaping. And we loved you until, Oh Randy. Hiring Alex just felt like a raping. Now some want to kill, Oh Randy. Sorry, mind went a wandering just then... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 I don't know where this £8m figure has suddenly come from, I bellieve it was £1m spent on the pub. think training ground was 8 million Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ender4 Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 I personally think we'll be going for a tiered system.. Back up players will be on £20-£30k a week, First team players £40-£50k a week and Key players £60k+.. We need to lower the wages of those that don't play much at all, some of the players we don't play are being paid about the same as someone that plays all season. If we lower those wages and remove some of the more overpaid MON signings we'd be able to afford a few £80k+ signings. Totally disagree with the numbers Back up players will be on 5k a week We have the likes of Bannan Baker Clark Lichaj Gardner all first teamers now all on less than 10-15k a week The times are a changing not a chance back-up players will be on £5/wk. i don't think there are any players in the Prem League on £5/wk. and those youngsters might be playing in the first team right now, but thats due to the injuries. they are still back-up players, rather than regular first-teamers, and if they do make the transistion next season to first-teamers, then you can be sure they'll be looking for a bumper pay-rise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smetrov Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 The most disappointing thing from Randy is his turnout to watch AVFC this season. Agreed - 2 games just highlights his lack of committment to the club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts