Lowton to Villa £3m

[broomhillblade]

Re Lowton:
"The Star understands his transfer was not processed until Friday due to negotiations about a sell-on clause being inserted into the deal.
Villa are also believed to have offered United the pick of some of their own young players - albeit on loan - in exchange."

Looks like our negotiating skills have improved since Turry's day.

 

[JohnDenver]

Looks like our negotiating skills have improved since Turry's day.

Hmmm.... I really don't want us to be blooding Villa's kids when we have our own.

Any loan player should either be the first name on the teamsheet or an emergency stopgap.

 

[Darren]

I was merely comparing criticism of their defensive qualities, which Kyle Walker also received a bit of when he was sold to Spurs. All I'm saying is things can be improved as long as you've got the natural talent.

Think you're underestimating Lowton a tad. He was being a decent player in division 3 because he had previously received limited opportunities to prove he was any better (with the exception of a few good performances in the Championship I might add). 23 is not that old either, he's still relatively young and at that age he has years of improvement ahead.

Whether he gets straight into Villa's starting eleven, only Lambert knows but he's certainly making those kind of sounds about it.

Perhaps he received "limited opportunities" when we were a decent second tier team because he wasn't good enough at that level. As I have said before he only got a regular place in the team in 2010-11 when we turned complete crap.

 

[Kentblade]

Re Lowton:
"The Star understands his transfer was not processed until Friday due to negotiations about a sell-on clause being inserted into the deal.
Villa are also believed to have offered United the pick of some of their own young players - albeit on loan - in exchange."

Looks like our negotiating skills have improved since Turry's day.

It could not have got any worse!
UTB

 

[Patrick Suffaux]

Perhaps he received "limited opportunities" when we were a decent second tier team because he wasn't good enough at that level. As I have said before he only got a regular place in the team in 2010-11 when we turned complete crap.

.....and apart from Quinn he was our best player. I'm not really sure what we're debating specifically but I see no reason why Lowton cant become a decent top flight player. Good footballer, still quite young, chips in with goals and assists. Seems worth a punt to me and a good young manager seems to agree with me.

On the subject of those limited opportunities, he seemed to lose his place in the side following the red card at Cardiff and at the same time Kevin Blackwell's departure from the club. Gary Speed then came in and signed Parrino and Micky Adams followed this up by opting for experienced players in defence initially, before finally giving Lowton a run at the end of the season when things got desperate.....if memory serves. Hardly a great set of circumstances for a young player to be given his big chance which probably explains why he wasn't.

 

[Darren]

.....and apart from Quinn he was our best player. I'm not really sure what we're debating specifically but I see no reason why Lowton cant become a decent top flight player. Good footballer, still quite young, chips in with goals and assists. Seems worth a punt to me and a good young manager seems to agree with me.

On the subject of those limited opportunities, he seemed to lose his place in the side following the red card at Cardiff and at the same time Kevin Blackwell's departure from the club. Gary Speed then came in and signed Parrino and Micky Adams followed this up by opting for experienced players in defence initially, before finally giving Lowton a run at the end of the season when things got desperate.....if memory serves. Hardly a great set of circumstances for a young player to be given his big chance which probably explains why he wasn't.

Well my point is that he wasn't that young when he was given his chance (coming up to 22) when he broke into a struggling second tier team. Compare with Naughton and Walker who were both around 19 when they broke into a promotioon chasing 2nd tier team.

As you say, a PL manager (who obviously knows a lot more about football than both of us) sees something in him, so it may be that Lowton may prove to be a good PL player. On past evidence though he seems to me he is likely to be a Morris or a Wayne Quinn rather than a Jagielka or Walker.

 

[Patrick Suffaux]

Well my point is that he wasn't that young when he was given his chance (coming up to 22) when he broke into a struggling second tier team. Compare with Naughton and Walker who were both around 19 when they broke into a promotioon chasing 2nd tier team.

As you say, a PL manager (who obviously knows a lot more about football than both of us) sees something in him, so it may be that Lowton may prove to be a good PL player. On past evidence though he seems to me he is likely to be a Morris or a Wayne Quinn rather than a Jagielka or Walker.

Its a well reasoned argument and you might well turn out to be right, hard to tell at this stage. For the record, I dont expect him to be as good as Kyle Walker but I could see him being just as good as Naughton (who is a very good player in his own right).

He's a different sort of player and he's at that age where there will naturally be more pressure for him to make an impression on the first team than there perhaps was on the Kyles. This is the perfect time for Matty really. All players tend to develop in different ways at different stages of their careers though so you can never tell. Kyle Walker had a big advantage over the other two in that at a very young age he was extraordinarily quick and athletic. That gives you a big head start!

 

[Ollessendro]

Out come the 'it'll be reit' brigade blindly defending the club. The we :heart: mediocrity lovers are back with avengance. They must be happy now.

Have you hard yourselves? 'We had to sell Lowton because we're financially screwed'. The lad cannot have been on more than a couple of k a week and the money received for him represents on a tiny share of turnover. Hardly brings us in line with the fair play rules does it. We'd probably have to offer double Lowton's salary to attract a right back that it half as good as him.

The debt that we owe is to McCabe. I suppose if he wants to service it then it is his perogative. However it is extremely short sighted. He has not learnt that by selling off our best assets and replacing them with older, worse players does not work. In fact it makes you much worse. Then of course you are 'forced' to sell of our best assets and replace them with more dross.

You mediocrity lovers want to bugger off down the M1 and watch Luton Town. Mind you, just stay in S2 for a couple of years as we'll be joining them .....

 

[Rodley]

Out come the 'it'll be reit' brigade blindly defending the club. The we :heart: mediocrity lovers are back with avengance. They must be happy now.

Have you hard yourselves? 'We had to sell Lowton because we're financially screwed'. The lad cannot have been on more than a couple of k a week and the money received for him represents on a tiny share of turnover. Hardly brings us in line with the fair play rules does it. We'd probably have to offer double Lowton's salary to attract a right back that it half as good as him.

The debt that we owe is to McCabe. I suppose if he wants to service it then it is his perogative. However it is extremely short sighted. He has not learnt that by selling off our best assets and replacing them with older, worse players does not work. In fact it makes you much worse. Then of course you are 'forced' to sell of our best assets and replace them with more dross.

You mediocrity lovers want to bugger off down the M1 and watch Luton Town. Mind you, just stay in S2 for a couple of years as we'll be joining them .....

You're full of mouth mate.

 

[stannyblade]

How do you stop a lad going to the Premier League? you cant when we are in the position we are in. What wage he was on was insignificant if the lad wanted to go. As for the comment that apart from Quinn being our best player last season I would say Willo, K Mac and a certain Mr Evans would argue that one.

 

[Highbury_Blade]

Out come the 'it'll be reit' brigade blindly defending the club. The we :heart: mediocrity lovers are back with avengance. They must be happy now.

Have you hard yourselves? 'We had to sell Lowton because we're financially screwed'. The lad cannot have been on more than a couple of k a week and the money received for him represents on a tiny share of turnover. Hardly brings us in line with the fair play rules does it. We'd probably have to offer double Lowton's salary to attract a right back that it half as good as him.

The debt that we owe is to McCabe. I suppose if he wants to service it then it is his perogative. However it is extremely short sighted. He has not learnt that by selling off our best assets and replacing them with older, worse players does not work. In fact it makes you much worse. Then of course you are 'forced' to sell of our best assets and replace them with more dross.

You mediocrity lovers want to bugger off down the M1 and watch Luton Town. Mind you, just stay in S2 for a couple of years as we'll be joining them .....

If the money we received for him is £1m, then this represents not far under under 10% of our turnover. if that rises to the full £3m, then that is about 28% of our turnover; hardly 'tiny fractions.' That extra turnover should come in especially handy next year as the salary/turnover ration drops another 5%, which Lowton's fee will contribute to.

 

[super_pig]

I think £3 million is a good price. Let's hope we can use some it to bring one or two in.

it's NOT 3 million .. don't believe the hype.. it is 700k plus addons.. if he becomes an England regular and moves to Real Madrid you might see 3 million.. you did put the sell on clause in this time?? you did kev??

 

[super_pig]

Selling one player if allows us to keep porter, monty and Quinny is surely good business isnt it?

Maybe now we can bring back Simmo?

meh.. behave swiss
and you forgot Cresswell

 

[baggie192]

Nah then my Baggie friend, nothing against your club or anything like that so don't take offence but what will you do when the Sky TV money runs dry as it surely will one day ? I could well be wrong here but personally I don't give a flying one about the Premiership and think a fair amount of the real football fans round the country are starting to feel the same, F1 is going the same way now it has sold out to Sky in other words the overpaid over-hyped losers the like of what we see in the England shirt are for many becoming a huge turn off, nobody really gives a fuck about a few millionaires who run about for 90 mins once a week and think they work hard. Seeing as you don't have Russian or Arab backer should the TV money stop you would find your club in a situation just like we are now in other words without TV cash you are nothing.

You missed my earlier post, It could have been yourself who said that its pipe dream to be self sustainable in prem. I pointed out that last year we had in fact turned £9 million pound profit, It would have been £11 million but we paid off the last 2 million mortgage on our Academy. We are within our means if/when the sky cash goes it isn't a problem because we are turning a profit aside from it now. You went up the year we lost to Derby in the the playoff final right? That means we lost out on at least £65 million pay off for that game. You would have got the extra from the automatic bonus plus the £65 million Parachute payment.

That is a huge miss on any business. By your logic we should have been league 1 bound the following year. Yet we won the Championship. Our long term plan has so far had two different phases. Phase 1 was 2002-2008 Strengthen for the Championship to make sure we get promoted back within 2 years but realise we can't really hang in the prem without putting the future of the club in doubt. Phase 2 2009-now was to stablise our club in the prem but live within our means. The reason RDM was sacked was he'd lost 12 in a row, but, even with that record we were above the dropzone. Ruthless, but, we got Hodgson and taking us to our best ever Prem finish yet we still turned a profit.

 

[Darren]

You missed my earlier post, It could have been yourself who said that its pipe dream to be self sustainable in prem. I pointed out that last year we had in fact turned £9 million pound profit, It would have been £11 million but we paid off the last 2 million mortgage on our Academy. We are within our means if/when the sky cash goes it isn't a problem because we are turning a profit aside from it now. You went up the year we lost to Derby in the the playoff final right? That means we lost out on at least £65 million pay off for that game. You would have got the extra from the automatic bonus plus the £65 million Parachute payment.

That is a huge miss on any business. By your logic we should have been league 1 bound the following year. Yet we won the Championship. Our long term plan has so far had two different phases. Phase 1 was 2002-2008 Strengthen for the Championship to make sure we get promoted back within 2 years but realise we can't really hang in the prem without putting the future of the club in doubt. Phase 2 2009-now was to stablise our club in the prem but live within our means. The reason RDM was sacked was he'd lost 12 in a row, but, even with that record we were above the dropzone. Ruthless, but, we got Hodgson and taking us to our best ever Prem finish yet we still turned a profit.

We went up in 2006, the year WBA were relegated. We went down the following year when WBA lost in the play off final. We were both in the 2nd tier in 2007-08 when you won it and we spent lots of money, appointed an arse as a manager, flirted with relegation, sacked him in Feb, improved dramatically and just missed out on the play offs.

 

[Balham]

it's NOT 3 million .. don't believe the hype.. it is 700k plus addons.. if he becomes an England regular and moves to Real Madrid you might see 3 million.. you did put the sell on clause in this time?? you did kev??

Source for that fee? Not having a dig at you SP but it's funny that some posters won't believe the higher numbers but as soon as someone offers a lower figure they'll use it as a stick to beat the club with. I heard it's £250k with another £25k for every 100 games he plays for Villa up to £3m.*

*I didn't really. I still think we got at least £2m guaranteed with the rest as performance related bonuses; and I would be amazed if there wasn't a sell-on clause.

 

[baggie192]

We went up in 2006, the year WBA were relegated. We went down the following year when WBA lost in the play off final. We were both in the 2nd tier in 2007-08 when you won it and we spent lots of money, appointed an arse as a manager, flirted with relegation, sacked him in Feb, improved dramatically and just missed out on the play offs.

Ah I stand corrected, but my points remain relevant though. Robson could only ever manage on a huge budget that Steve Gibson at boro gave him. Thats why we sacked him

 

[JohnDenver]

We are within our means if/when the sky cash goes it isn't a problem because we are turning a profit aside from it now.

Are you saying that if you removed the Sky money from this year's accounts and your outgoings remained the same, then you're still in profit?

That simply cannot be true...

 

[baggie192]

Are you saying that if you removed the Sky money from this year's accounts and your outgoings remained the same, then you're still in profit?

That simply cannot be true...

it can its called being well run. We spent 5.2 million on incoming transfers and made 8.3 million in player sales. Last Year we used £10 million to pay off our academy mortgage from our turnover which £16 million that took a hefty chuck of our profit the final payment this year is £1.87m Sky money we received was £17 million had we deffered the payment we would of made £19.1 million without Sky

 

[JohnDenver]

it can its called being well run. We spent 5.2 million on incoming transfers and made 8.3 million in player sales. Last Year we used £10 million to pay off our academy mortgage from our turnover which £16 million that took a hefty chuck of our profit the final payment this year is £1.87m Sky money we received was £17 million had we deffered the payment we would of made £19.1 million without Sky

Anyone else confused by that explanation?

 

[baggie192]

Anyone else confused by that explanation?

Okay I'll explain. From fan revenue (ST sale, merch and stadium concessions) we made £8 million. Corperate (boxes Player screen Sponsorship and stadium advertising) £4 million and shirt sponsorship £4 Million add that up its £16 million correct? Player transfers we sold players for £8.3 Million and bought players for 5.2 million therefore making a profit £3.1 million. So thats £19.1 million Now Sky paid us £17 million.

You originally said "Are you saying that if you removed the Sky money from this year's accounts and your outgoings remained the same, then you're still in profit?

That simply cannot be true..."

What may have confused you is that even without the Sky money last year we could afford to pay the last part of our academy Mortgage and still have 9.1 million left over. Follow me now?

 

[raul]

Well done for getting everyone to work for love Bagsy.

 

[JohnDenver]

Okay I'll explain. From fan revenue (ST sale, merch and stadium concessions) we made £8 million. Corperate (boxes Player screen Sponsorship and stadium advertising) £4 million and shirt sponsorship £4 Million add that up its £16 million correct? Player transfers we sold players for £8.3 Million and bought players for 5.2 million therefore making a profit £3.1 million. So thats £19.1 million Now Sky paid us £17 million.

You originally said "Are you saying that if you removed the Sky money from this year's accounts and your outgoings remained the same, then you're still in profit?

That simply cannot be true..."

What may have confused you is that even without the Sky money last year we could afford to pay the last part of our academy Mortgage and still have 9.1 million left over. Follow me now?

I follow your sums (and this may be my lack of understanding of accounting), but WBA's wage bill must be £20m+ a year. How come that's not part of the calculation?

 

[baggie192]

I follow your sums (and this may be my lack of understanding of accounting), but WBA's wage bill must be £20m+ a year. How come that's not part of the calculation?

Now your asking two different things the true turnover is £38 Million because of the sky money wages are taken from that, however we have 50% relegation clause in the contracts and because of the yo yoing the club's in a position to pay a fair amount for years to come

 

[JohnDenver]

Now your asking two different things the true turnover is £38 Million because of the sky money wages are taken from that, however we have 50% relegation clause in the contracts and because of the yo yoing the club's in a position to pay a fair amount for years to come

Righto. So if Sky took their money away at the earliest opportunity, then you'd need to get relegated to stay in good financial shape.

 

[Ollessendro]

If the money we received for him is £1m, then this represents not far under under 10% of our turnover. if that rises to the full £3m, then that is about 28% of our turnover; hardly 'tiny fractions.' That extra turnover should come in especially handy next year as the salary/turnover ration drops another 5%, which Lowton's fee will contribute to.

The last recorded turnover was £16m (2010/11) and that is likely to be used in fair play roles. So Lowton's fee is likely to be well under 10%. Regardless it will not count towards nothing in terms of turnover. The point is that we have let a very good, young player go for no reason. The money will not be reinvested and we'll replace him with a much worse player. For the numpties that keep asking how do you stop a player going to the Premiership, well it is quite simple YOU REJECT THE BID! Cue the mediocrity lovers rambling about us not being a selling club BUT when a player wants to leave you cannot stop him.

You know what the worse part about this is? I am getting drawn into the sea (no ocean) of mediocrity. At first I was angry, but that has subsided and a wave of apathy has washed over me. Actually it is more of a tsunami. I have never been so unexcited about a forthcoming season. I am in danger of embracing mediocrity like the rest of the it'll be reiters. I need to spend some time in my shed ... alone!?

 

[alcoblade]

It makes no odds if the turnover is £10M of £100M. If you're losing "£1M" per year, it has to come from somewhere. Some expect that McCabe stumps up further millions after injecting their own £50. Others accept there has to be another way, unfortunately. The only common ground is that most are angry with McCabe and just about nobody's happy, they just see diferent ways out of the current mess. Mediocrity lovers don't exist.

Life will start to improve in a years time - whichever division we're in.

UTB

 

[metalblade]

Anyone else confused by that explanation?

Yep I am, although I don't have a degree in Maths I can clearly see those figures do not add up.

 

[Pittsburg Blade]

it's NOT 3 million .. don't believe the hype.. it is 700k plus addons.. if he becomes an England regular and moves to Real Madrid you might see 3 million.. you did put the sell on clause in this time?? you did kev??

From a Villa site...3mil my arse:
Aston Villa have clinched the signing of Matthew Lowton from Sheffield United.
What can we tell you about him?
1) Lowton is a right-back, who can also play at centre-back or in midfield, and could replace Alan Hutton in the side, and cost just £800,000.

 

[stannyblade]

From a Villa site...3mil my arse:
Aston Villa have clinched the signing of Matthew Lowton from Sheffield United.
What can we tell you about him?
1) Lowton is a right-back, who can also play at centre-back or in midfield, and could replace Alan Hutton in the side, and cost just £800,000.

Must be true then