Zatman Posted April 19, 2013 Share Posted April 19, 2013 thats from May 2012. he sold the Browns after that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted April 19, 2013 Share Posted April 19, 2013 Yes I know but my point was he still has substantial wealth, whether his interest in Villa has declined is another matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharkyvilla Posted April 19, 2013 Share Posted April 19, 2013 from the Guardian Accounts for the year to 31 May 2012 Ownership: Owned by Randy Lerner, via Reform Acquisitions LLC, a USA company Turnover: 9th in league, £80m (down from £92m in 2011) Gate and matchday: £20m TV and broadcasting: £47m Commercial: £14m Wage bill: 7th, £70m (down from £83m) Wages as proportion of turnover: 87.5% Loss before tax: £18m (following £54m loss last year) Net debt: £122m Interest payable: £7m Highest-paid director: £256,000 to unnamed director (Paul Faulkner is the chief executive) State they're in: Exceptional among the US buyers, Randy Lerner has spent hugely on Villa – in equity and loans, now at £107m – yet his promising tenure has declined. Lerner has been financially hit by the banking crisis, having sold his MBNA company in return for Bank of America shares, and he is trying to cut back on overspending and losses. Ashley Young, Gareth Barry, James Milner and Stewart Downing, four England internationals, are now memories; Villa's accounts state Paul Lambert's "youthful, highly motivated first-team squad … will prove eminently sustainable in the long term." That remains to be seen, and is not a statement of grand ambition. Didn't he sell the Cleveland browns for 1billion. That 87.5% wages to turnover is far too high. New legislation is being brought in anyway so we have to get it down. We could be shedding up to £20m-25m a year in wages this summer plus the new TV money will come in, that 87.5% figure will go down dramatically if we stay up. Considering the hole we've been in that's a very good turn around and hopefully something to build upon again. Does anyone know how much the TV deal will be worth to us next season? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted April 19, 2013 Share Posted April 19, 2013 Will the new tv deal not then force higher wages. For example a player who would have signed for £20,000 a week last summer surely won't be signing for that much this summer. So like most clubs while our income increases I'd imagine wages will start to increase in terms of new signings and offering new contracts to the likes of Benteke and Weimman. Also the fact we're probably going to finish near the bottom means our slice of the new money will be lower than the majority of other clubs which again isn't providing much of an advantage. I still don't think under Lerner the plan is anything but survive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sutherland Posted April 19, 2013 Share Posted April 19, 2013 I have a great idea, Lets blame MON for paying some knob head of a yes man £256k a year to lick poo pipe instead of keeping one eye on the books! Then we can all feel better again! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briny_ear Posted April 20, 2013 Share Posted April 20, 2013 (edited) It's a great new chant, to be sure... "We are Villa...we are 'eminently sustainable in the long term'!" Edited April 20, 2013 by briny_ear 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted April 20, 2013 Share Posted April 20, 2013 I have a great idea, Lets blame MON for paying some knob head of a yes man £256k a year to lick poo pipe instead of keeping one eye on the books! Then we can all feel better again! judging by the fact Paul Faulkner was the third CEO after Fitzgerald & Cunnah.... I suspect all was not rosy between MON and Ceo's Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted April 20, 2013 Share Posted April 20, 2013 I have a great idea, Lets blame MON for paying some knob head of a yes man £256k a year to lick poo pipe instead of keeping one eye on the books! Then we can all feel better again! considering he just gets under 5k a week, Faulkner salary really shouldnt be used as a stick to beat him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted April 20, 2013 Share Posted April 20, 2013 It's come to something when we can talk about someone 'just' getting over ten times the average salary. **** this sport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MagicMushroom Posted April 20, 2013 Share Posted April 20, 2013 It's come to something when we can talk about someone 'just' getting over ten times the average salary. **** this sport. Totally agree. The game is fcuked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted April 20, 2013 Share Posted April 20, 2013 It's come to something when we can talk about someone 'just' getting over ten times the average salary. **** this sport. agree it is actually a joke. Just was in comparison to other people in similar positions. Am sure Kenyon was on at least 10 times that at Chelsea Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Villarocker Posted April 21, 2013 Share Posted April 21, 2013 It's come to something when we can talk about someone 'just' getting over ten times the average salary. **** this sport. agree it is actually a joke. Just was in comparison to other people in similar positions. Am sure Kenyon was on at least 10 times that at Chelsea The Directors at the company I work for are all on 300k plus per year and that's nothing to do with sport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sutherland Posted April 21, 2013 Share Posted April 21, 2013 I have a great idea, Lets blame MON for paying some knob head of a yes man £256k a year to lick poo pipe instead of keeping one eye on the books! Then we can all feel better again! considering he just gets under 5k a week, Faulkner salary really shouldnt be used as a stick to beat him. 5k a week! I wouldnt pay him in wing nuts pal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted April 21, 2013 VT Supporter Share Posted April 21, 2013 And you know what Faulkner's role is? Or are you mindlessly speculating? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted April 21, 2013 VT Supporter Share Posted April 21, 2013 (edited) That isn't an answer to the question. In this thread about whether or not Faulker is doing a job worthy of his salary. Yet none of us really know what Faulker's remit is. Do you? That's all I'm asking. The debate about positives about this season is ongoing in the other thread. Lets not bring it here. Edited April 21, 2013 by StefanAVFC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted April 21, 2013 Share Posted April 21, 2013 well Faulkner has done his job perfectly. He has got us increased marketing deals in sponsorship and kit manufacturing. Also has been given the task of cutting costs which are hurting 1st team at moment but we have potential of a solid base and planning which I dont think the club has had for a very long time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morpheus Posted April 22, 2013 Share Posted April 22, 2013 (edited) Excellent news that Faulkner is doing his job. Now if we could only get the team right. Edited April 22, 2013 by Morpheus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted April 22, 2013 VT Supporter Share Posted April 22, 2013 (edited) Will the new tv deal not then force higher wages. For example a player who would have signed for £20,000 a week last summer surely won't be signing for that much this summer. So like most clubs while our income increases I'd imagine wages will start to increase in terms of new signings and offering new contracts to the likes of Benteke and Weimman. The new TV deal is a false economy. As you say, it will force wages up. Clubs will use the money initially to pay really high wages to the players they want to attract. Then as other players join or existing players want parity, they get paid the same. Eventually every club has to pay inflated wages to every player and the extra money everyone's gotten from the TV deal is eaten up. As someone very eloquently put it on here (I think it was The_Rev but apologies if it wasn't), it's like being at the theatre and someone near the front stands up to get a better view. So the person behind him stands up so he can see better, and then the person behind him stands up to do the same etc etc. Eventually everyone's standing up, so everybody has the same view that they had before, but now nobody has a seat. Edited April 22, 2013 by Stevo985 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted April 22, 2013 VT Supporter Share Posted April 22, 2013 It's come to something when we can talk about someone 'just' getting over ten times the average salary. **** this sport. Not really when you're talking about chief execs and CEOs etc. £300k isn't a lot for those kind of roles at a lot of companies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romavillan Posted April 22, 2013 VT Supporter Share Posted April 22, 2013 Will the new tv deal not then force higher wages. For example a player who would have signed for £20,000 a week last summer surely won't be signing for that much this summer. So like most clubs while our income increases I'd imagine wages will start to increase in terms of new signings and offering new contracts to the likes of Benteke and Weimman. The new TV deal is a false economy. As you say, it will force wages up. Clubs will use the money initially to pay really high wages to the players they want to attract. Then as other players join or existing players want parity, they get paid the same. Eventually every club has to pay inflated wages to every player and the extra money everyone's gotten from the TV deal is eaten up. As someone very eloquently put it on here (I think it was The_Rev but apologies if it wasn't), it's like being at the theatre and someone near the front stands up to get a better view. So the person behind him stands up so he can see better, and then the person behind him sands up o do the same etc etc. Eventually everyone's standing up, so everybody has the same view that they had before, but now nobody has a seat. yep very true, but before or after the inflation if you are overpaying seemingly as a policy, then you are in for a rough time financially. it's about getting value for what you pay at the end of the day. something we did not get before. now, IF we stay up and get the TV money our current wage bill will be far less % wise than it was giving lambert some room to rebuild. his policy is not to offer stupid money for average quality players, i'd probably trust him to get value for money which ultimately puts us in a better position. the argument that we'll have more to spend so we'll have better players isn't enough you need someone at the helm who will use the money much better than we have seen in the past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts