Big_John_10 Posted May 20, 2013 Share Posted May 20, 2013 I'll get behind him if I can see a clear plan and an interest to make us more than a nothing midtable team. At the moment I'm still not sure wether we have that plan or its just to keep costs down and survive. Considering how much he's been praised as an owner I think these 3 pretty piss poor seasons in a row are worth mentioning. That's all fair enough. We've had our different opinions on what Lerner shall take the blame for and not. Let's not go there again. But I wonder what you would consider a good enough progress next season to give him the benefit of a doubt that we've actually turned a corner and are making progress again? What will it take to make you feel that maybe he too has learnt from his mistakes and might actually start to be a good owner in your eyes? I mean, we'll probably not make very big noises in the league next season, a mid table finish is to be expected IMO if we're going forward. I don't think we can expect a very high finish, at least. Get what I mean? To be honest if we have a comfortable season next year then I'll start to be a bit more convinced. I think it's going to take a few years for me to fully believe in him again, simply because its going to take a few years to really show what the plan will be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pelle Posted May 20, 2013 Share Posted May 20, 2013 I'll get behind him if I can see a clear plan and an interest to make us more than a nothing midtable team. At the moment I'm still not sure wether we have that plan or its just to keep costs down and survive. Considering how much he's been praised as an owner I think these 3 pretty piss poor seasons in a row are worth mentioning. That's all fair enough. We've had our different opinions on what Lerner shall take the blame for and not. Let's not go there again. But I wonder what you would consider a good enough progress next season to give him the benefit of a doubt that we've actually turned a corner and are making progress again? What will it take to make you feel that maybe he too has learnt from his mistakes and might actually start to be a good owner in your eyes? I mean, we'll probably not make very big noises in the league next season, a mid table finish is to be expected IMO if we're going forward. I don't think we can expect a very high finish, at least. Get what I mean? To be honest if we have a comfortable season next year then I'll start to be a bit more convinced. I think it's going to take a few years for me to fully believe in him again, simply because its going to take a few years to really show what the plan will be. And that's also fair enough. I don't expect you to turn around just like that unless we reach the CL or something like that next season, but just wanted to know how much it would take for those who're very doubtfull of him. Good answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeyAnty Posted May 20, 2013 Share Posted May 20, 2013 The club will only be its true self when its selfsustaining. I for one wouldnt want villa being a Man city or Chelsea in terms of buying leagues and trophies. You need your club to have a soul and these clubs i mentioned are being ripped out. Ask a true city fan who supported their club in 3rd div what they think. If you get success with putting in the hard work, development and time then it will be more sweeter when you do win. I havent felt as close to a Villa team in a long long time and we were nearly relegated. What does that say... Ps dont answer that Villa are about as far from being self sustaining as it's possible to get. There's the thick edge of £200m to pay back before we're that. Ask any fan of a lower league club if they think we're some shining beacon of worthiness. We're not, we've just wasted nearly a quarter of a billion quid of a bored billionaire playboy's inheritance. 200m, where you get that from? Its 120million. And when i say self sustaining i mean making profit, which includes paying back the debt year on year to Lerner. Reason why we are 120 million in debt is because we werent self sustaining and with all these high earners going id be very surprised if we dont make a self sustaining profit next year! We'vd made £165m of combined losses to date, and loans plus share capital (ie the entire amount of money that Lerner has put in) is well over £200m. Your wrong. Net debt at Aston Villa stood at £121.5m at the year end date of 31 May 2012, the accounts just filed at Companies House showed. http://www.insidermedia.com/insider/midlands/86111-aston-villa-cuts-losses-177m Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted May 20, 2013 Share Posted May 20, 2013 Can we please please please please stop using Ellis as some sort of benchmark for how we asses the performance of Lerner. This isn't directed at anyone individual just a general plea. Can't we just judge him on his own merits rather than in reference to a man who well... I won't even go there. Sure but I think its slightly unfair to point the blame at Lerner for our lowly finishes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted May 20, 2013 Share Posted May 20, 2013 The club will only be its true self when its selfsustaining. I for one wouldnt want villa being a Man city or Chelsea in terms of buying leagues and trophies. You need your club to have a soul and these clubs i mentioned are being ripped out. Ask a true city fan who supported their club in 3rd div what they think. If you get success with putting in the hard work, development and time then it will be more sweeter when you do win. I havent felt as close to a Villa team in a long long time and we were nearly relegated. What does that say... Ps dont answer that Villa are about as far from being self sustaining as it's possible to get. There's the thick edge of £200m to pay back before we're that. Ask any fan of a lower league club if they think we're some shining beacon of worthiness. We're not, we've just wasted nearly a quarter of a billion quid of a bored billionaire playboy's inheritance. 200m, where you get that from? Its 120million. And when i say self sustaining i mean making profit, which includes paying back the debt year on year to Lerner. Reason why we are 120 million in debt is because we werent self sustaining and with all these high earners going id be very surprised if we dont make a self sustaining profit next year! We'vd made £165m of combined losses to date, and loans plus share capital (ie the entire amount of money that Lerner has put in) is well over £200m. Your wrong. Net debt at Aston Villa stood at £121.5m at the year end date of 31 May 2012, the accounts just filed at Companies House showed. http://www.insidermedia.com/insider/midlands/86111-aston-villa-cuts-losses-177m No I'm not, you just don't understand the accounting concepts being discussed. I've actually got a copy of the May 2012 accounts in front of me, so kindly point out which of the facts I've stated is wrong, and what the correct figure should be. When we're talking about money introduced by Lerner (which we were), debt is of course, only half the story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted May 20, 2013 Share Posted May 20, 2013 (edited) David Conn @david_conn 4m Borussia Dortmund, coming to Wembley: wage bill £68m (less than Aston Villa), controlled by members, crowd 80,000 http://bit.ly/18YYz9x David Conn @david_conn 12m Borussia Dortmund's 2011-12 wage bill of £68m would have been 8th highest in Premier League, just under #avfc (£134m less than #mcfc). Edited May 20, 2013 by drat01 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted May 20, 2013 Moderator Share Posted May 20, 2013 Villa are about as far from being self sustaining as it's possible to get. There's the thick edge of £200m to pay back before we're that...No I'm not, you just don't understand the accounting concepts being discussed. I've actually got a copy of the May 2012 accounts in front of me, so kindly point out which of the facts I've stated is wrong, and what the correct figure should be. When we're talking about money introduced by Lerner (which we were), debt is of course, only half the story.Perhaps the bit left in the quote "Villa are about as far from being self sustaining as it's possible to get. There's the thick edge of £200m to pay back before we're that. "?I'm not arguing - I'm questioning, by the way. If the club "owes" 121 mill, is that the "thick end" of 200 mill?Anyway, whichever it is, it's a heck of a lot of money that will have to be paid back over time. And as you say, the club is not "self sustaining" which is the declared aim, though clearly it's on the way there, sort of. But still a mess really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P3te Posted May 20, 2013 Share Posted May 20, 2013 If the club can cover wages, transfer fees, operating fees and loan repayments/interest with its annual income, it is self sustaining. Doesn't matter if we owe £10 or £10bn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeyAnty Posted May 20, 2013 Share Posted May 20, 2013 The club will only be its true self when its selfsustaining. I for one wouldnt want villa being a Man city or Chelsea in terms of buying leagues and trophies. You need your club to have a soul and these clubs i mentioned are being ripped out. Ask a true city fan who supported their club in 3rd div what they think. If you get success with putting in the hard work, development and time then it will be more sweeter when you do win. I havent felt as close to a Villa team in a long long time and we were nearly relegated. What does that say... Ps dont answer that Villa are about as far from being self sustaining as it's possible to get. There's the thick edge of £200m to pay back before we're that. Ask any fan of a lower league club if they think we're some shining beacon of worthiness. We're not, we've just wasted nearly a quarter of a billion quid of a bored billionaire playboy's inheritance. 200m, where you get that from? Its 120million. And when i say self sustaining i mean making profit, which includes paying back the debt year on year to Lerner. Reason why we are 120 million in debt is because we werent self sustaining and with all these high earners going id be very surprised if we dont make a self sustaining profit next year! We'vd made £165m of combined losses to date, and loans plus share capital (ie the entire amount of money that Lerner has put in) is well over £200m. Your wrong. Net debt at Aston Villa stood at £121.5m at the year end date of 31 May 2012, the accounts just filed at Companies House showed. http://www.insidermedia.com/insider/midlands/86111-aston-villa-cuts-losses-177m No I'm not, you just don't understand the accounting concepts being discussed. I've actually got a copy of the May 2012 accounts in front of me, so kindly point out which of the facts I've stated is wrong, and what the correct figure should be. When we're talking about money introduced by Lerner (which we were), debt is of course, only half the story. We are 120 million in debt, whats wrong about that? Thats what we owe, if we went into Admin thats what we got to pay to get out of it. Whats this 200 million we owe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeyAnty Posted May 20, 2013 Share Posted May 20, 2013 If the club can cover wages, transfer fees, operating fees and loan repayments/interest with its annual income, it is self sustaining. Doesn't matter if we owe £10 or £10bn 100% correct! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted May 20, 2013 Moderator Share Posted May 20, 2013 If the club can cover wages, transfer fees, operating fees and loan repayments/interest with its annual income, it is self sustaining. Doesn't matter if we owe £10 or £10bn 100% correct! How do you figure that? In the accounts published in May showed that we lost £54m this in a period in which we made a profit, yes profit on player trading of £8.1m. In addition Lerner waved interest owed to him of £20.3m. So how exactly do you figure that the club can cover wages, transfer fees, operating fees and loan payments with its annual income? I'm curious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeyAnty Posted May 20, 2013 Share Posted May 20, 2013 If the club can cover wages, transfer fees, operating fees and loan repayments/interest with its annual income, it is self sustaining. Doesn't matter if we owe £10 or £10bn 100% correct! How do you figure that? In the accounts published in May showed that we lost £54m this in a period in which we made a profit, yes profit on player trading of £8.1m. In addition Lerner waved interest owed to him of £20.3m. So how exactly do you figure that the club can cover wages, transfer fees, operating fees and loan payments with its annual income? I'm curious. I'm not saying we can yet, but thats the goal. If i knew id be a wealthy man. One things for sure, Lerner didnt buy Villa for a hobby. Hes a business man and he wants a profit. How he does this is anyones guess. Getting rid of high earners is a good start Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted May 20, 2013 Share Posted May 20, 2013 Can we please please please please stop using Ellis as some sort of benchmark for how we asses the performance of Lerner. This isn't directed at anyone individual just a general plea. Can't we just judge him on his own merits rather than in reference to a man who well... I won't even go there. Sure but I think its slightly unfair to point the blame at Lerner for our lowly finishes. Why would you think that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P3te Posted May 20, 2013 Share Posted May 20, 2013 If the club can cover wages, transfer fees, operating fees and loan repayments/interest with its annual income, it is self sustaining. Doesn't matter if we owe £10 or £10bn 100% correct! How do you figure that? In the accounts published in May showed that we lost £54m this in a period in which we made a profit, yes profit on player trading of £8.1m. In addition Lerner waved interest owed to him of £20.3m. So how exactly do you figure that the club can cover wages, transfer fees, operating fees and loan payments with its annual income? I'm curious. Just to clarify, I didn't actually say the club WAS self sustaining, I was simply pointing out the definition of a self sustaining club, since there seemed to be quite a bit of confusion and a few takes on it We weren't self sustaining last set of books. We'll be closer to it the next set, and I'd be very surprised if, come September, we're not as good as there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P3te Posted May 20, 2013 Share Posted May 20, 2013 Hes a business man and he wants a profit. How he does this is anyones guess. Getting rid of high earners is a good start Being successful is the best way to do it. That's why I don't understand why people think Lerner wants anything but that. He wanted it when he took it over, and he wants it now - it's just that now we'll have to do it the sensible way Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted May 20, 2013 Moderator Share Posted May 20, 2013 Just to clarify, I didn't actually say the club WAS self sustaining, I was simply pointing out the definition of a self sustaining club, since there seemed to be quite a bit of confusion and a few takes on it We weren't self sustaining last set of books. We'll be closer to it the next set, and I'd be very surprised if, come September, we're not as good as there Sorry, I read it as you were saying it was but that was my error having read it again it is clear you weren't saying that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smetrov Posted May 20, 2013 Share Posted May 20, 2013 If the club is to be self sustaining, why do we need a billionaire chairman ? - My hope when an american billionaire brought the club was that he would to a greater or lesser extend finance us to buy some better players ? Surley thats the first thing we would look at, if Lerner sold up - how much dosh do the new owners have ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeyAnty Posted May 20, 2013 Share Posted May 20, 2013 Hes a business man and he wants a profit. How he does this is anyones guess. Getting rid of high earners is a good start Being successful is the best way to do it. That's why I don't understand why people think Lerner wants anything but that. He wanted it when he took it over, and he wants it now - it's just that now we'll have to do it the sensible way But then what way do you get success? Can we compete with the top 4? When we bring through good young players and buy well like Bentekke they will want to move on and earn the big bucks. And players have all the power. Money is ruining football and the sooner this fair play rule comes in all the better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smetrov Posted May 20, 2013 Share Posted May 20, 2013 Hes a business man and he wants a profit. How he does this is anyones guess. Getting rid of high earners is a good start Being successful is the best way to do it. That's why I don't understand why people think Lerner wants anything but that. He wanted it when he took it over, and he wants it now - it's just that now we'll have to do it the sensible way But then what way do you get success? Can we compete with the top 4? When we bring through good young players and buy well like Bentekke they will want to move on and earn the big bucks. And players have all the power. Money is ruining football and the sooner this fair play rule comes in all the better. Oh the Irony ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RunRickyRun Posted May 20, 2013 Share Posted May 20, 2013 Your wrong. Net debt at Aston Villa stood at £121.5m at the year end date of 31 May 2012, the accounts just filed at Companies House showed. http://www.insidermedia.com/insider/midlands/86111-aston-villa-cuts-losses-177m That doesn't include the equity which Randy has put in since buying the club (circa 130m) which does not sit as a 'debt' on the balance sheet but is still money the club owes to Randy. If you add the debt & equity to the initial cost of buying the club, you're looking at the thick end of nearly 300m which Randy has invested. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts