Sign up NOW for our daily Villa newsletter direct to your inbox Subscribe Thank you for subscribing We have more newsletters Show me See our privacy notice Invalid Email

Paul Faulkner gave an unequivocal statement to the Birmingham Mail in response to a weekend report in a national newspaper that Randy Lerner was putting Aston Villa on the market for £200 million.

“I can categorically confirm that Aston Villa Football Club has absolutely not been put up for sale and that Randy Lerner is not actively looking to sell the club,” said Faulkner.

Strong words – and as the board so rarely go on the record, it is doubtful the chief executive would have been quite so definitive had Lerner intended to flog Villa in the next few months.

True, he was hardly likely to come out and say, ‘Yes, we’re inviting bids on eBay starting at x amount of pounds and pence’, but he did have the option of following his US lawyer gaffer, pleading the Fifth Amendment and saying nothing.

Of course ‘...Villa has not been put up for sale... Randy Lerner is not actively looking to sell...’ is different from saying the club is ‘not for sale’ and the owner ‘would not sell’.

In the hypothetical event of a wealthy benefactor approaching Villa and making a lucrative offer, Lerner would have a big decision to make. But that is no different to most/all of Villa’s Premier League peers – and the majority of football clubs in the world, for that matter.

My house is not for sale, there is no estate agents’ board out the front, but if someone knocked my door and offered me significantly more than I had paid for it, including what I had spent on refurbishments, then the removal van’s wheels would already be spinning.

Similarly, Lerner has not instructed a city financier or any of his advisors to find a buyer – there is no metaphoric ‘For Sale’ sign in Trinity Road – but if someone dangled the £200 million touted in Sunday’s press he might be tempted.

It would reimburse the £62.6 million he paid for the club and a sizeable chunk of the £250 million he has invested into the playing squad and facilities at Villa Park and Bodymoor.

At that price, with Villa’s history, infrastructure, fanbase and near debt-free status, any would-be buyer would, on the face of it, get a decent deal.

Some supporters, growing weary of the fall from grace of recent seasons, would welcome a change and have wistfully reprised a rare Lerner quote from when he bought the club from Doug Ellis in August 2006.

“If I can’t make it work, I will do what the others did, move on and let someone else try.”

But Lerner has not reached the level where he is prepared to cut his ties with Villa – or even cut his Proud History, Bright Future scarves.

In truth, there is the belief in the corridors of power, based on the club’s current mid-table respectability and improved financial health, that Villa are finally emerging through the challenging post-2010 times with reasons for optimism.

Indeed, rather than looking for investors to replace him, Lerner is actually seeking them to help him and the club. With Financial Fair Play rules in mind, Villa are investigating ways of generating fresh funds to boost their turnover.

It is early days, but there has been tentative talk of attracting a sponsor to possibly fund a bold revamp of the outdated North Stand area, with naming rights and less controversial revenue streams mooted.

Lerner was recently ranked third on the Birmingham Post’s Midlands Rich List with an estimated fortune of £1 billion, so it’s fair to say the 51-year-old is still worth a few quid.

But Villa want to get to the stage where the club look after themselves rather than needing a sugar daddy to prop them up, even though that approach will not appease those fans craving a quicker fix.

There is no doubt he was scarred by the breakdown of his relationship with Martin O’Neill and the financial and emotional legacy of that period is a more prudent and private chairman since August 2010.

Questions about his commitment will persist while he continues to be conspicuous by his absence at Villa Park. But, those closest to Lerner insist he is as involved as ever in the decision-making and, if they’re really honest, supporters are more interested in his presents than his presence.

Video Loading Video Unavailable Click to play Tap to play The video will start in 8 Cancel Play now

Paul Lambert, who by common consensus has had the hardest part of the claret and blue credit crunch to deal with, has still been afforded a net transfer spend of £40 million spread across two seasons. There is a willingness from the board to continue this kind of outlay on transfer fees in future windows, while each target’s wage demands will be decided on an individual basis.

Now that Lambert has overhauled his playing staff in terms of quantity with half-a-dozen or more signings in each of the summers of 2012 and 2013, it is hoped the pot of cash (roughly £20 million in each of the past two years) can be used instead to recruit two or three proven players to supplement the squad with more quality.

That was the thinking behind acquiring the Premier League experience of Ryan Bertrand and Grant Holt in January, albeit it on loan, and it transpires a substantial bid was made last month for a target for whom a deal could not quite be struck – and we’re talking much more substantial than Norwich’s Wes Hoolahan.

That, as far as I can ascertain, is The Plan; to build on the foundations Lambert has put in place and, with the Glaswegian at the helm, improve the young players at the club, improve the quality of the signings and improve the league position and cup prospects.

It is one hell of a challenge for this chairman, this board and this manager to try to deliver such a hopeful, trend-bucking vision and return Villa to the higher echelons at a rate the commendably patient fanbase will eventually start to demand. But it is one they are in no rush to walk away from.