Writer: AVbornandbred 
Date:Thursday December 20 2012
Time: 10:12AM
Given all of the recent wage cuts and the selling of players combined with the managerial disaster that was McLeish the board and Randy have come in for a fair amount of stick, but I wonder if things are about to change.
At a recent meeting of premiership clubs to vote on stricter financial controls Man City where one of three teams who voted against as you would expect, but far more surprising was the vote of our very own Aston Villa. Rather than joining in the throng of those asking for parity and sanctions to prevent big spending we voted against the proposed measures. This surprising turn of events got me thinking, why on earth would the Villa management oppose such a move?
I can only think of two reasons, either Randy is planning to invest or he is planning to sell to a party that would like to invest. As everyone knows Randy recently brought an end to his association with the Browns, receiving a nice amount of money in the process. It could well be that Randy now has plans to offload Villa in a similar fashion and I know many would welcome the investment of a sheikh or oligarch.
Given the turbulent recent times it would be hard to blame Randy if he had decided to depart the world of sports ownership altogether but whilst this turn of events might see untold riches ploughed into our mighty club I suspect it is unlikely as Randy has said time and again that he is committed to the Villa. I'm not as convinced by PL as many are, or as willing to buy into the hype around certain players after just a few games but it is fair to say that he has definitely done the job he was brought in to do so far. The wage bill is lower, the playing staff are younger and his signings are showing potential whilst the football on the pitch is still developing with signs of promise. Randy probably feels as comfortable with his manager as he ever has and I would imagine is pretty happy with the way things have been shaping up.
When Randy first arrived he backed MON to the hilt and I have a suspicion that now he finally has a man in place who he can trust and who is delivering on his side of the bargain, that he is getting ready to make the same level of funding available to PL over the course of the next few years.
It could be interesting and exciting times ahead if this truly is the start of a new four year plan.
AVbornandbred
See forum thread for more: More Premiership Financial Plans
The Villa Times - 23/05/2013 (Thursday May 23 2013)
The Vital Villa Player Of The Season Is... (Thursday May 23 2013)
Bumper Transfer News - SOME Inward! (Thursday May 23 2013)
New Contracts? Better Deals? It's Only Money!! (Thursday May 23 2013)
Petrov Delighted With Assistant Coach Role (Wednesday May 22 2013)
Broadcasting Revenue For AVFC For 2012/13 Season (Wednesday May 22 2013)
N'Zogbia Exit And £5m Given To Keeper? (Wednesday May 22 2013)
Villa's Pre Season Schedule (Tuesday May 21 2013)
Vlaar Pleased With First Good Touch Of The Game (Tuesday May 21 2013)
Villa Season Ticket Help Sessions (Tuesday May 21 2013)
| 1. | Pride of Lions | 1003 |
| 2. | The Fear | 773 |
| 3. | BodyButter | 509 |
| 4. | kefkat | 414 |
| 5. | CDX_EIRE | 328 |
| 6. | ClivetheVillan | 304 |
| 7. | Villan57 | 244 |
| 8. | thefacehead | 241 |
| 9. | DeanoVilla | 230 |
| 10. | holtelower | 202 |
| Latest Results | ||||
| Wigan | 2 | - | 2 | Aston Villa |
| Aston Villa | 1 | - | 2 | Chelsea |
| Norwich | 1 | - | 2 | Aston Villa |
| Aston Villa | 6 | - | 1 | Sunderland |
| Man Utd | 3 | - | 0 | Aston Villa |
| Aston Villa | 1 | - | 1 | Fulham |
| Team | P | W | D | L | GD | Pts |
| 12. Fulham | 38 | 11 | 10 | 17 | -10 | 43 |
| 13. Stoke | 38 | 9 | 15 | 14 | -11 | 42 |
| 14. Southampton | 38 | 9 | 14 | 15 | -11 | 41 |
| 15. Aston Villa | 38 | 10 | 11 | 17 | -22 | 41 |
| 16. Newcastle | 38 | 11 | 8 | 19 | -23 | 41 |
| 17. Sunderland | 38 | 9 | 12 | 17 | -13 | 39 |
| 18. Wigan | 38 | 9 | 9 | 20 | -26 | 36 |
| Saints Elite Centre Still Has Places Available
» Southampton : 23/05/2013 18:47:00
|
| The Villa Times - 23/05/2013
» Aston Villa : 23/05/2013 18:07:00
|
| Managerial Odds Update
» Stoke : 23/05/2013 18:01:00
|
| Pulis Thanks Fans
» Stoke : 23/05/2013 17:53:00
|
| Rat the Optimist
» West Ham : 23/05/2013 16:47:00
|
| Carroll Make Your Mind Up Son!
» West Ham : 23/05/2013 16:46:00
|
| Carroll Injury Update
» West Ham : 23/05/2013 16:45:00
|
I feel that this could be a little simpler than conspiracy theorists think. The first thing is that part of the proposal is that wages increase by no more than 5%. That's 5% for the club not per player. So, if the Villa are getting their house in order to a wage bill of, say, £40m then 5% of that would be £2m which as we know is far less than a top players wage. This means that in order to bring in a £4m wage player we would need to sell a £2m wage player and that's the most we could do. But here's the rub, if Man City's wage bill is currently £150m then 5% of that is £7.5m and because the wage bill is already higher we know that players must be on higher wages (Balotelli at City is on £170k a week as his 2 week fine yesterday was £340k). So, if Balotelli leaves they have his wage (£9m) plus the 5% club increase £7.5m (£16.5m in total) to spend on new players wages compared to the Villa who would have £4m. As far as I can see there is no suggestion of capping transfer fees, just wages. So, the proposed system would benefit those teams who currently have a bigger wage bill and penalize those with a smaller wage bill who wish to build up the wage bill as performance improves. Clubs who feel they are currently at their limit would support the proposal and clubs who want to spend more than 5% in the future would be against the proposal.