• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Vinai Venkatesham - CEO

There was a very significant moment where he said 'their model' (the Lewis') was to 'empower the people on the ground to deliver against the ambition they have' and that they 'believe' in the people in place. It tells me that we will see a lot more 'departmental autonomy'. I have never heard anything like that before.
 
vinai says he knows the lewis family well and the second generation will get more involved to bring on-pitch success. also, new chairman does not get involved in the day to day.

i am now suspecting that vinai was key in pushing levy out.
 
thfcsteff said:
There was a very significant moment where he said 'their model' (the Lewis') was to 'empower the people on the ground to deliver against the ambition they have' and that they 'believe' in the people in place. It tells me that we will see a lot more 'departmental autonomy'. I have never heard anything like that before.
Click to expand...
I thought that bit was generic MBA platitudes
 
thfcsteff said:
There was a very significant moment where he said 'their model' (the Lewis') was to 'empower the people on the ground to deliver against the ambition they have' and that they 'believe' in the people in place. It tells me that we will see a lot more 'departmental autonomy'. I have never heard anything like that before.
Click to expand...
Think Munn was saying just the same.
 
metalgear said:
vinai says he knows the lewis family well and the second generation will get more involved to bring on-pitch success. also, new chairman does not get involved in the day to day.

i am now suspecting that vinai was key in pushing levy out.
Click to expand...
Nah. DLs role is now split (and tbh pretty much like it would be in most companies) Charringtons title (and as such, role) is different to DL.

It's probably more a Lewis money, ownership/buyer direction thing.
 
ricky2tricky4city said:
Nah. DLs role is now split (and tbh pretty much like it would be in most companies) Charringtons title (and as such, role) is different to DL.

It's probably more a Lewis money, ownership/buyer direction thing.
Click to expand...
good to hear

for all the levy-out noises that I have made through the years, i am now feeling bad the way the owners managed his departure!
 
Gazza Dazzla said:
I felt the whole piece was. Not really a criticism as such, I don’t want a Forest type owner, but I wouldn’t read anything in to what was said it was just corporate jargon. Actions will speak louder than words and we’ll have to wait to find out.
Click to expand...
Tbh I don't think even any of Vinis words suggested anything is going to change. Seemed like the whole message being sent out was to dampen all the speculation and that things were very much as you were, business as usual....
 
harr1984 said:
Tbh I don't think even any of Vinis words suggested anything is going to change. Seemed like the whole message being sent out was to dampen all the speculation and that things were very much as you were, business as usual....
Click to expand...
An interesting thing that Milo said on this week's pod, is the loan we took out at the end of August was 'secured against future earnings' ... which is a bit aligned to basket case clubs...borrowing money from the future, just to keep the transfers turning.
Id guess DL would be totally against this.

Of course, I don't know the amount of the loan or the financial reasoning it was needed. ie it could be a perfectly reasonable move as, for example, timings just didn't match up re payments, ease cash flow etc.
 
Last edited:
ricky2tricky4city said:
An interesting thing that Milo said on this week's pod, is the loan we took out at the end of August was 'secured against future earnings' ... which is a bit aligned to basket case clubs...borrowing money from the future, just to keep the transfers turning.
Id guess DL would be totally against this.
Click to expand...
Not so sure, as lending was one way to solve the issue of taking investments from the shareholders and Levys shares becoming diluted because he doesn't have 30m cash to invest.
ricky2tricky4city said:
Of course, I don't know the amount of the loan or the financial reasoning it was needed. ie it could be a perfectly reasonable move as, for example, timings just didn't match re payments, ease cash flow etc.
Click to expand...
Well the club need investment to keep spending and realise the dreams to catupult forward. See above, investing money from shareholders is inherently problematic for Levy right as it most likely would dilute his shares. Funny no one has really picked up on this. Outside investment is also a way for Levy to maintain his shareholding without finding personal money to invest in the club.
 
Last edited:
ricky2tricky4city said:
An interesting thing that Milo said on this week's pod, is the loan we took out at the end of August was 'secured against future earnings' ... which is a bit aligned to basket case clubs...borrowing money from the future, just to keep the transfers turning.
Id guess DL would be totally against this.

Of course, I don't know the amount of the loan or the financial reasoning it was needed. ie it could be a perfectly reasonable move as, for example, timings just didn't match re payments, ease cash flow etc.
Click to expand...
Nor heard that pod yet
Where did he get that info from?
 
SpurMeUp said:
Not so sure, as lending was one way to solve the issue of taking investments from the shareholders and Levys shares becoming diluted because he doesn't have 30m cash to invest.

Well the club need investment to keep spending and realise the dreams to catupult forward. See above, investing money from shareholders is inherently problematic for Levy right as it most likely would dilute his shares. Funny no one has really picked up on this. Outside investment is also a way for Levy to maintain his shareholding without finding personal money to invest in the club.
Click to expand...
Levy has been eliminated from any say in how we go about raising funds or outside investment. So he has two choices, he accepts the dilution as he thinks he comes out better in the long run because of the incoming investment (much like the club does) or he cashes in all of his holding or part of.

On the other part. There well maybe some justification for taking a loan, but borrowing from the future is always a bit brick, it's all a bit Klarna, chasing your tail.
Look at the clubs Macquarie already have on their loan book and it's the Leicester, Southamptons Sheff Utd etc...plus the interest rates ain't pretty. (The 6-7% quoted was from 5 years ago)

www.theguardian.com

Why Premier League clubs are turning to an Australian bank in big numbers

Teams in England’s top two divisions are taking sizeable loans from Macquarie, at times mortgaged against future TV earnings
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back