Remember who was telling you about the situation at Aston Villa this summer......

[Matt Damon]

they can if lerner stays solid - thats the benefit and problem when it comes to debts due to owners. as long as he can transfer monies from his profitable company X to his midlands football club Y their debt level to him (as the overall owner of both) is not especially relevant... its only when he cant transfer money across, or if he walks away, that they are ****ed.

Thats the point though, the issue of him actually putting any money in.

He claims to have put £138million in. Well therey're £100million in debt - so where has the rest of the money gone?

And he's taking this season £6million out of the company back to his holding company...

So its cloak and mirrors on what is he actually putting in?

And why and how is he letting their balance sheet deteriorate like he has....

Don't believe he's just a bottomless pit putting money in. Because he isn't.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Its not rosy no. But its a HELL of a lot better than I'd say 80% or even 90% of other clubs in the league.

For one the wage:turnover of many other clubs is just unsustainable in itself.

Let alone the huge debts some have. Villa have both!

Sure, Villa aren't in a good way, but I'm not fussed about Villa. The two teams in our ballpark that worry me are Spurs and City. Spurs are profitable in a decent way already and with CL football they could cement their place up there quite easily. They certainly have the financial footing to do so. City are City.

It should be a concern for clubs because there does seem a distinct shift between what London clubs can earn and what other clubs can earn. Arsenal, Chelsea and Spurs all rake in the cash over and above the tv money they get. Man Utd are an anomoly because they earn as much from overseas as they do in Britain. Liverpool will struggle now CL income isn't coming in.

 

[Waddy]

Villa are now looking around at other clubs and seeing what the damage is going to be if they do start selling their prize assets. They are squeezing Man City and rightly so with the cash they have to splash, I would expect at least 30M to be the magic number. Will 30M be enough for Villa though to keep the rest of the squad and carry on?
They will be looking at the situations of all the clubs below them, looking to see what they are going to spend. If the likes of Sunderland, Birmingham, Fulham do spend then Villa have to be worried about where they will finish. They must know whatever happens they have a squad that isnt going to get relegated with the teams coming up so maybe they just need to ride the storm and re-group?
They must be looking at whats happened to Pompey and what could happen to Liverpool and thinking they need to get rid and get some cash back!

 

[davek]

Kenwright out!

This.

 

[Sharpys top lip]

Kenwright out!

This.

That.....

 

[kenada_blue]

Citeh...up the usual shithouse way again going for a player away on international duty.

Citeh fans still actually believe the Lescott deal was good business hahaha.

End of the day...they need to be able to walk before they can run. The only thing certain at Citeh is that its uncertain...managers, players etc no one knows if they're gonna be there long term.

So this "we'll be challenging the title in 3 years" is all mouth and all players should know this after the £300mill they've already spent, and finishing in the same position we did for a fraction of the cost...and finished 4th..and got a cup final in the bag....

Add to this a host of players are leaving that club (Bellamy, Ireland, Philips, Petrov) they've gotta spent another £100mill just to try and get 4th hahaha.

Milner's at a bigger club already. But if he goes he's gonna be pushed rather than wanting to go IMO>

 

[BobLoblaw]

They'll be fine, unless Lerner decides to bail on them. That seems unlikely considering he lives over there and has a Villa tattoo. He knew exactly what he was doing, loaning the club his money to build up a squad that was in shambles and on the edge of relegation. It's not like they're spending future Champions League money. They probably won't spend nearly as much though now that the squad is decent. At this point, if I were Lerner, I'd thank O'Neill for his services and start looking for a manager that could spend my money more efficiently. They've had some really bad buys that aren't doing anything for them.

I don't think they'll sell Milner unless City make a too good to refuse type offer. You get to a point where it would be stupid not to sell.

If you can't tell, I've been following Lerner's dealings at Villa with interest because I'm a Cleveland Browns fan.(his other team)

 

[Matt Damon]

They'll be fine, unless Lerner decides to bail on them. That seems unlikely considering he lives over there and has a Villa tattoo. He knew exactly what he was doing, loaning the club his money to build up a squad that was in shambles and on the edge of relegation. It's not like they're spending future Champions League money. They probably won't spend nearly as much though now that the squad is decent. At this point, if I were Lerner, I'd thank O'Neill for his services and start looking for a manager that could spend my money more efficiently. They've had some really bad buys that aren't doing anything for them.

I don't think they'll sell Milner unless City make a too good to refuse type offer. You get to a point where it would be stupid not to sell.

If you can't tell, I've been following Lerner's dealings at Villa with interest because I'm a Cleveland Browns fan.(his other team)

huh?

I think you'll find last summer they spent NET £30million - effectively gambling on recouping that money in champions league money this year.

They will sell, because Villa's balance sheet is deteriorating badly.

You don't have a 20% increase in debt inside of 12 months coupled to a 90% wage turnover ratio ... fail to increase revenues ... and say that everything is hunky dory.

It's not and they will sell.

Its all cloak and daggers, but they are not in a good financial position.

 

[stinger]

Despite horrible format it was published, it should fit here - http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/may/19/premier-league-finances

 

[Matt Damon]

Despite horrible format it was published, it should fit here - http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/may/19/premier-league-finances

It's got some glaring and terrible errors in it.

Elstone's "salary" for one. Admitted to begin with.

West Ham's debts. IS NOT £46million. It's at least £100million they were not sure at the exact figure during their take over.

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/stand...re-still-pound-110m-in-debt-say-new-owners.do

West Ham are still £110m in debt, say new owners
James Olley
West Ham's new owners have revealed the club are £110million in debt - despite their takeover.

David Sullivan and David Gold disclosed the dire state of the finances at Upton Park and are seeking to create a consortium to help spread the deficit around.

Sullivan claimed the Hammers owe £50m to banks, £40m to other clubs - including compensation for Sheffield United after the Carlos Tevez affair - and are still yet to complete severance payments to former manager Alan Curbishley. The pair's future spending will also be constrained as the previous incumbents borrowed against a large percentage of season ticket sales for the next two seasons.

Sullivan said: "We are inheriting a lot of the problems from a few years ago.

"This is no criticism of Icelandic investment bank Straumur, which has kept the club alive, but it is the previous regime that has run up enormous debts and has taken on enormous liabilities and debts that this club just cannot support.

"We have paid down some of the debt and we have injected some money as working capital but there is still £110m of debt here.

"In very simplistic terms, £50m is owed to banks and £40m to other clubs.

"With most clubs you owe money and you are owed money. Here, West Ham owe £40m to other football clubs that includes Sheffield United.

"But West Ham are not owed a single penny by other clubs because when they have sold players, they have discounted debts with banks.

"In addition, West Ham have borrowed against 70 per cent of next season's ticket money, 60 per cent of the season after that. Those three figures alone come to £102m, in addition you have the Alan Curbishley settlement and with other bits and pieces the real debt is about £110m."