HeyAnty 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. So what did he buy then, a stadium/football players/brand/training facilities etc. I know where you are coming with this equity but we dont owe him anything for that. He knew what he was getting when he forked out the money to Doug. The running of the club and the debt run up, yes he is owed. Though you could argue that his running of the club ran up this debt and he doesnt deserve it either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted May 20, 2013 Share Posted May 20, 2013 Were we ever self sustaining under Doug? I genuinely don't really know much about our accounts back then and would be interested in finding this out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 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 I think he wanted success, just like he did at the browns. The issue is he's pretty **** useless. Now after his divorce and losing money I'm not sure if he still does. 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 I think he wanted success, just like he did at the browns. The issue is he's pretty **** useless. Now after his divorce and losing money I'm not sure if he still does. Why wouldn't he? Why would anyone that owns a sporting team that would be far more valuable as a successful club NOT want them to be successful? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted May 21, 2013 Share Posted May 21, 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 I think he wanted success, just like he did at the browns. The issue is he's pretty **** useless. Now after his divorce and losing money I'm not sure if he still does. Why wouldn't he? Why would anyone that owns a sporting team that would be far more valuable as a successful club NOT want them to be successful? Because its going to take spending money to make us successful and right now I'm not sure if he wants that or if he's happy to keep costs down until he can find a buyer. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P3te Posted May 21, 2013 Share Posted May 21, 2013 (edited) it wouldn't cost as much as it would cost us if we were relegated though plus he'll make far more from selling a reasonably successful club than one that's not successful Edited May 21, 2013 by P3te Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted May 21, 2013 Moderator Share Posted May 21, 2013 I think you need to define what success is or rather what success is to Randy Lerner. Obviously he wants success, he has since he arrived it is just I believe how he defines that which has changed. He always came here looking to make a profit, people shouldn't kid themselves about that it was always the case. He picked us after looking at lots of clubs and seeing the potential that we all felt was there under Ellis and to be fair to him he tried to tap into it but had the wrong manager and wasn't in control enough to stop it all going wrong. When he arrived he wanted to build a successful team on the pitch and a successful club off it, to improve the value of the club and ultimately walk away after 10 years (a time frame stated by the General on here) with a profit on his investment and having had some fun. Things are very different now both for him and his personal finances and in terms of the landscape of football, to such an extent that I think his definition of being successful is now very different. I think he has accepted we can't compete or has given up on the desire to do so, he no longer is looking for a successful team that has now become secondary to financial goals and financial success. He is now driven by a desire and to some extent a need to reduce costs, to make the club sustainable from its own income rather than to try and win things. The problem is through his woeful appointments and their performances commercial revenue has fallen and we've been forced (it is questionable how fight we put up to keep them) to sell our best players. Costs have been cut I think to a minimum yet they will be cut further this summer in terms of wages. But we have stayed in the league while reducing wages two years running and that I'm afraid I think to Lerner at this stage of his ownership is the only success he is really interested in. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted May 21, 2013 Share Posted May 21, 2013 it wouldn't cost as much as it would cost us if we were relegated though plus he'll make far more from selling a reasonably successful club than one that's not successful Will he make that much more? I mean we're not getting in the champions league so will he sell the club for lots more if we say finish 7th instead of 14th? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted May 21, 2013 Moderator Share Posted May 21, 2013 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 startWhich businesses does the businessman own? He ceased to be a businessman some time ago Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hippo Posted May 21, 2013 Share Posted May 21, 2013 I think you need to define what success is or rather what success is to Randy Lerner. Obviously he wants success, he has since he arrived it is just I believe how he defines that which has changed. He always came here looking to make a profit, people shouldn't kid themselves about that it was always the case. He picked us after looking at lots of clubs and seeing the potential that we all felt was there under Ellis and to be fair to him he tried to tap into it but had the wrong manager and wasn't in control enough to stop it all going wrong. When he arrived he wanted to build a successful team on the pitch and a successful club off it, to improve the value of the club and ultimately walk away after 10 years (a time frame stated by the General on here) with a profit on his investment and having had some fun. Things are very different now both for him and his personal finances and in terms of the landscape of football, to such an extent that I think his definition of being successful is now very different. I think he has accepted we can't compete or has given up on the desire to do so, he no longer is looking for a successful team that has now become secondary to financial goals and financial success. He is now driven by a desire and to some extent a need to reduce costs, to make the club sustainable from its own income rather than to try and win things. The problem is through his woeful appointments and their performances commercial revenue has fallen and we've been forced (it is questionable how fight we put up to keep them) to sell our best players. Costs have been cut I think to a minimum yet they will be cut further this summer in terms of wages. But we have stayed in the league while reducing wages two years running and that I'm afraid I think to Lerner at this stage of his ownership is the only success he is really interested in. Good post. It just makes me wonder though, in the Jan window when relegsation looked probable, Randy and his finances were no where to be seen. Is he that bothered at all ? - Despite the number crunching on this thread - If he sold up, the losses he would make would be smaller beer to a guy like Lerner. Hes just happy to tick over, in this division or the one below. I doubt the wellbeing of Aston Villa is on his mind much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurtsimonw Posted May 21, 2013 Share Posted May 21, 2013 it wouldn't cost as much as it would cost us if we were relegated though plus he'll make far more from selling a reasonably successful club than one that's not successful Will he make that much more? I mean we're not getting in the champions league so will he sell the club for lots more if we say finish 7th instead of 14th? An extra £5m is an extra £5m at the end of the day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted May 21, 2013 Moderator Share Posted May 21, 2013 In January Lambert wanted to buy players but couldn't, he wanted to try and resolve the obvious weakness in the side but couldn't because he wasn't given the financial means to do so. He eventually got a pittance out of Lerner which allowed him to get Sylla but that was about it. I agree with you that he is happy to tick over in this division with the new TV contract, the financial well being is I think more important to him now than ever but the football side of things? I think that has lost its interest for him and is simply a means to an end. He couldn't sell up now, he wouldn't get enough for us to allow him to walk away, he couldn't lose that kind of amount of cash even after the sale of the Browns. As I've been saying for a while now, we are in for a couple more years of reducing costs and debt before he looks to sell in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted May 21, 2013 Share Posted May 21, 2013 it wouldn't cost as much as it would cost us if we were relegated though plus he'll make far more from selling a reasonably successful club than one that's not successful Will he make that much more? I mean we're not getting in the champions league so will he sell the club for lots more if we say finish 7th instead of 14th? An extra £5m is an extra £5m at the end of the day. I'm not saying he wouldn't want that extra £5 million. But is he prepared to spend more money to try and sell the club for a bit more? I'm not sure he'd happily invest more money to try and finish a bit higher in order to sell the club for a bit more money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted May 21, 2013 Share Posted May 21, 2013 If an owner, who already owns 100% of the issued share capital, pumps more money into the club via share capital, then it points to the fact that the club isn't self sustaining. I'm not sure he'd happily invest more money to try and finish a bit higher in order to sell the club for a bit more money. He certainly didn't in January when it was our darkest hour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PussEKatt Posted May 21, 2013 Share Posted May 21, 2013 The Cleveland Browns were never ever a sucessful team,not a far as I can remember anyway,so I think he really does not know what he is doing.He knows sweet FA about football,he is rarely in England, so it stands to reason that AVFC will do worse than the Browns did ?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaForever1970 Posted May 21, 2013 Share Posted May 21, 2013 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted May 21, 2013 Share Posted May 21, 2013 Were we ever self sustaining under Doug? I genuinely don't really know much about our accounts back then and would be interested in finding this out. was a complete different ball game in terms of finances back then though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted May 21, 2013 Share Posted May 21, 2013 Were we ever self sustaining under Doug? I genuinely don't really know much about our accounts back then and would be interested in finding this out. was a complete different ball game in terms of finances back then though While spending has had to increase so has the amount of money coming into the club. I'd genuinely like to know because under Doug we were usually a top 8 side, had seasons playing in Europe, won a cup and were seen as a good premiership team. Yet we were desperate to see him gone. Now it seems we're happy because potentially our current owner might be aiming to get us to the level the owner we wanted rid of had us at. It doesn't make much sense to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeyAnty Posted May 21, 2013 Share Posted May 21, 2013 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 Which businesses does the businessman own? He ceased to be a businessman some time ago You think villa isnt a business to him? Sorry to burst your bubble but thats exactly what it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeyAnty Posted May 21, 2013 Share Posted May 21, 2013 Were we ever self sustaining under Doug? I genuinely don't really know much about our accounts back then and would be interested in finding this out. was a complete different ball game in terms of finances back then though While spending has had to increase so has the amount of money coming into the club. I'd genuinely like to know because under Doug we were usually a top 8 side, had seasons playing in Europe, won a cup and were seen as a good premiership team. Yet we were desperate to see him gone. Now it seems we're happy because potentially our current owner might be aiming to get us to the level the owner we wanted rid of had us at. It doesn't make much sense to me. The playing field was alot more even back then. Then came along the big money boys buying up clubs as insurance policies for themselves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts