1. Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!

Steve L time to sell the club

Discussion in 'Bristol City' started by Red Robin, Apr 8, 2017.

  1. BCFCRob

    BCFCRob Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2011
    Messages:
    2,962
    Likes Received:
    852
    Don't disagree on the finance side, but he manages the financial loss. It's his loss and it doesn't harm the company because he's never going to call the debt in. If he wants to throw money at it then let him, it's not going to harm the club unless he suddenly ups and leaves, which he won't. It's not the way that I'd run a club but I don't see it as dangerous.

    How would the FC be self-sufficient? Well we're overspending massively at the moment (still), but let's face it, if there came a time where he announces he's going to leave in 2 years time, we're in a better position to be self-sufficient than we were. We have a stadium which can finally generate significant off-field revenue, we already have a good training ground, we have an established academy system which has had significant investment in recent years (not like the preceding years where it was there and never used - admittedly it remains to be seen if this changes). We're in a good position in that respect, if you take away the throwing £10m on players (which we wouldn't be able to do should he leave).

    In answer to your first question, well we'd own the ground, but it would be the old ground, with development work still necessary. Yes we had tentative plans, but we all know the new stadium plans would not have come to fruition. The Ashton Gate redevelopment might have, but nothing like the scale that we have now. We couldn't even get the East End rebuilt in the 00's. We'd also have our old training ground, the equivalent of Gary Johnson's brother as a scouting 'network' - we'd be more on a par with Rovers than Brighton/Reading, etc.
     
    #21
  2. Cliftonville

    Cliftonville Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2012
    Messages:
    3,371
    Likes Received:
    1,113
    I seriously doubt BCFC will close to self sufficient in two years. Circa twenty million pound in are outstanding and repayable in 2020(?). The FC is skint.

    Redevelopment at Ashton gate was abandoned due to Mr Lansdown wanting to pursue other avenues.

    Bristol City don't have a stadium. The club are tenants.

    Who owns the training facility?.

    With the losses post 2002 BCFC could have redeveloped the stadium, and borrowed money versus the assets. Clubs do this all the time. I think it is bizarre with the expertise of men like John Laycock ( involved in building projects including sport facilities) at the FC BCFC would only be able to redevelop Ashton Gate via the means of one human being.

    A balanced answer to hypothetical question would be: Owning a stadium and its associated facilities, with a serviceable debt/ money in the bank going on the FC's factual pre Mr Lansdown past performance. League position? Big hypothetical, but hardly any team of reasonable comparison has done worse.,
     
    #22
  3. Angelicnumber16

    Angelicnumber16 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2011
    Messages:
    12,898
    Likes Received:
    3,030
    As I've said before, our football club has lost its independence and to a certain degree its identity under the continually failing Bristol Sport banner.
     
    #23
  4. johngalleyfan2

    johngalleyfan2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2011
    Messages:
    14,770
    Likes Received:
    943
    The stadium is self sufficient all the out goings should be covered by events and vendors fee's, this leaves the rugby and football people to "live off their respective incomes"
     
    #24
  5. BCFCRob

    BCFCRob Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2011
    Messages:
    2,962
    Likes Received:
    852
    Well this is the point, if we were in a situation where we have to be self-sufficient, transfer spending and wages would be slashed. My point is that we are in a much better position to be self-sufficient than immediately prior to SL's reign,

    True, but the original plans were still nothing like what we have now. A new East End would not have transformed the ground financially or aesthetically like we have now. There was a very early plan to redevelop both the EE and Williams but they never progressed whatsoever.

    I could be wrong but I'm almost certain that SL confirmed Bristol City's holding company do own the stadium, not Bristol Sport. Though to all intents and purposes it makes no difference which part of the Bristol Sport umbrella owns the ground in the current situation.

    I don't know enough about this sort of thing to understand how it works, but I don't doubt that you're correct. There must have been reasons it wasn't done though.

    But if we look at the years before SL joined, all teams 'of reasonable comparison' had done much better off-the-field. If we take similar sized clubs at the time, maybe Huddersfield, Reading, QPR, Stoke; they were probably considered the larger teams in League One along with ourselves around that period. The only club which, like us, hadn't kicked on off-the-field was QPR.
     
    #25
  6. Mind the gap!

    Mind the gap! Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2013
    Messages:
    3,180
    Likes Received:
    252
    I think that anyone wishing for SL to go needs to have a serious look at themselves.

    This is the sort of mad delusion that doesn't help our club
     
    #26
  7. Cliftonville

    Cliftonville Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2012
    Messages:
    3,371
    Likes Received:
    1,113
    The FC prior to Steve Lansdowns reign was at times self sufficient. Not at all times because other times it was ran at a loss with a serviceable debt. That is losses past income nothing like the 100 - 140% Mr Lansdown was opting. That type of loss season to season was covered by loans and diluting the share holding of fans (shareholders) to a negligible level.

    The original plan, plans obviously were different. There were plans submitted for stands larger than the eventual reality at Ashton Gate.

    There is no new East End. Mr Lansdown opted for a open design and any redevelopment will transform a stadium aesthetically. The significance there is subjective. Transforming the FC financially? There is no financial fine detail beyond vague projections to make an assertion. BCFC do not own the asset, or its building and operating costs but do share its revenue. Sharing is less than actually owning its revenue which is what would have happened previously beyond outsourcing catering elements to meet building costs..

    I could be wrong but I'm almost certain that SL confirmed Bristol City's holding company do own the stadium ... Yes a holding company that was owned by Steve Lansdown (96%), Keith Dawe (2%). I cant evidence base that because the record is no longer on line via companies house ... The FC is Steve Lansdown. Bristol Sport is Steve Lansdown and the operation who lend money to BCFC called Pula is Steve Lansdown.

    The ground development would have been pursued if Mr Lansdown had not had taken over the FC and vetoed building. Mr Lansdown originally wanted to build at Ashton Vale in a shared development with other business partners.

    Bristol City in the last fifteen years have not kicked on off or on the pitch. That could be put down to bad luck ... Personally I do not believe in luck in football. The FC has been run unevenly.

    Bristol City is Steve Lansdown. Quite how that can be changed is beyond me. Nobody would buy a FC with next to no assets ... Interesting topic though.
     
    #27
  8. BCFCRob

    BCFCRob Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2011
    Messages:
    2,962
    Likes Received:
    852
    I find it incredibly frustrating to debate with you Cliftonville because at times it's as if you're being deliberately obtuse, despite obviously knowing what you're talking about and obviously being more up-to-speed than I am in the subject. I'm not disputing the facts you keep repeating (with no direct acknowledgement or answer to my points). Your first paragraph is just a repeat of what you said before, without addressing my latest point of the fact that we're most likely in a better position to be self-sufficient than prior to SL joining. You can say we were at times self-sufficient, but that was with ancient facilities and no modernisation in any sector of the club (scouting/youth/training/stadium) which would have inevitably pushed us towards loss.

    With regard to the stadium plans, you say any significance is subjective, which is 100% untrue. Compare what we've got now with the only plan that actually got off the ground (the EE redevelopment), potential revenue isn't even comparable. What we have now is miles ahead in terms of off-the-field income.

    "Bristol City in the last fifteen years have not kicked on off or on the pitch" - completely disagree. The club is nothing like how we were in 2002. We might not have the results to show it, but we're certainly in a better position for potential success than we would be. Imagine the 2002 club competing in the Championship right now and it's a complete change.

    But yes, completely agree on the final point. No one would buy City in it's current form, but I can't say that bothers me. When you look at club takeovers of our size, the vast majority in recent years tend to put the club in a more perilous position than they were beforehand. Massive losses or not, the club is safe for now.
     
    #28
  9. Red Robin

    Red Robin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2011
    Messages:
    15,242
    Likes Received:
    2,149
    The bottom line guys under SLs ownership,the amount of money spent by him has not reflected on the pitch.

    Millions and Millions have been wasted,apart from GJ, and SC, the managers have either been hung out to dry,or have not performed.
     
    #29
  10. Mind the gap!

    Mind the gap! Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2013
    Messages:
    3,180
    Likes Received:
    252
    Perhaps that's why Landsdown is trying to provide a more permanent set up for our club
     
    #30

  11. Cliftonville

    Cliftonville Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2012
    Messages:
    3,371
    Likes Received:
    1,113
    Rob has some difficulty replaying to your posts ...

    The football club is not in a better position than it was in 2002 to becoming sustainable because the FC was already sustainable prior to Mr Lansdown taking over. The club did on occasions break even, make a profit, have money in the bank and make losses that were serviceable = Sustainable.

    The club at this point and for years to come is not sustainable. Its loans will not be repaid via the FC. The sale of Kodjia will not pay for new signings and salaries. All = Not sustainable. If you can provide financial projections how sustainability will be achieved please do so. At Q&A's vague detail has been provided but the finer detail of how revenue will be divided was not. As for annual share holders meetings for ?? They are no more.

    "Bristol City in the last fifteen years have not kicked on off or on the pitch" - completely disagree. The club is nothing like how we were in 2002. We might not have the results to show it ... That is one no on the pitch. And yes Bristol City financial position off the pitch is worse and there have been regular concerns raised about the viability of BCFC as a going concern in the club account summaries ... Not made up, that is a truth.

    You can say we were at times self-sufficient, but that was with ancient facilities and no modernisation in any sector of the club (scouting/youth/training/stadium) which would have inevitably pushed us towards loss ... That is another untruth. There were plans to modernise and improve aspects of BCFC which had planning consent. In regards to youth development the centre pf excellence/academy was more successful than its later version. Mr Lansdown also initially ran down the centre post John Laycock, Mr Lansdown also employed Managers with sketchy cv's when it came to promoting academy players, later in adherence with the EPPP BCFC invested in infra structure, coaches and applied successfully for Cat 2 status. Well done Mr Lansdown but the unnecessary break in continuity and emphasis means there is a lot of catching up to do.

    With regard to the stadium plans, you say any significance is subjective, which is 100% untrue. Compare what we've got now with the only plan that actually got off the ground (the EE redevelopment), potential revenue isn't even comparable. What we have now is miles ahead in terms of off-the-field income ... Your paragraph is 100% untrue. The south stand which occupies the site of the former East End is neither of the two earlier designs . It is 100% a different plan to both designs. With respect if you did not know/understand that all your other points are null and void.

    Posters are correct. BCFC is Mr Lansdown. One person. That is the future fans right back in 1982 created a FC constitution to prevent.

    I have hopes for the academy and hope its progresses but the FC is more a toy than football club.
     
    #31
  12. johngalleyfan2

    johngalleyfan2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2011
    Messages:
    14,770
    Likes Received:
    943
    An extremely acute serious look at themselves, it is beyond the realm of mad deluded
     
    #32
    Mind the gap! likes this.
  13. BCFCRob

    BCFCRob Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2011
    Messages:
    2,962
    Likes Received:
    852
    Yep, and take the club in that form, and what type of playing squad would we need to have to be sustainable? League Two quite possibly.

    At no point did I claim we are. I said we are in a better position. Better academy + bigger stadium + better training ground + established scouting network = better chance of sustainability in the future.

    It is not an untruth. The only established plans for the stadium would have made minimal difference financially in comparison to what we have now. I'm not going to argue on the Centre of Excellence as you probably know more than me but having players come into the first team from it in League One does not mean it was better. It means the manager used what he had. I'd be amazed if the facilities back then were better than what we have now,.

    The bit in bold makes me think you've misunderstood my post, because that's not what I said. The new South Stand is not like any of the original plans at all that I was referring to. My point was that the original plans (EE redevelopment, and prior to that the EE and Williams joint development which didn't get anywhere) would not have made as much revenue as what we currently have.

    Ultimately we're both aware of the financial concerns around the club, you're just more concerned than me, which is fair enough. I don't see any issue while SL is at the helm, but if you don't get on with him or are not a fan, then I can understand the frustration, because it doesn't look like he will be shifted any time soon.
     
    #33
  14. Red Robin

    Red Robin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2011
    Messages:
    15,242
    Likes Received:
    2,149
    Des Taylor spoke his mind = fired

    John Pemberton spoke his mind=fired

    Steve Cotterill spoke his mind=fired

    The board wanted LJ gone.

    What is the common denominator

    Ah my way or the highway says the owner<doh>
     
    #34
  15. BCFCRob

    BCFCRob Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2011
    Messages:
    2,962
    Likes Received:
    852
    Literally made this up <doh> <laugh>
     
    #35
  16. johngalleyfan2

    johngalleyfan2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2011
    Messages:
    14,770
    Likes Received:
    943
    JP had a different outlook that was deemed to be compatible with what was the overall plan
    SC certainly spoke his mind when in front of the camera's should have kept it shut
    the board discussed the position of LJ no where has it been said they wanted rid of
    Des Taylor round peg in square hole different ideas and outlook ...

    My way? well does more and put up with more than most get in a lifetime .. without his support ........... and vision, ongoing by the way .... we might not be putting in foundations just knee jerking our way to a time when half a dozen results move us into top half season after season after season .... and PREM dream becomes PREM dream
     
    #36
  17. Angelicnumber16

    Angelicnumber16 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2011
    Messages:
    12,898
    Likes Received:
    3,030
    He had the chance of a permanent set up with SC at the helm. The most successful Manager of recent times and a double winner to boot.

    But instead he's backed a lame horse and refuses to have it shot or sent to the knackers yard no matter how bad things get, or what league we end up playing in next year,

    For me that is the cardinal sin.
     
    #37
    Red Robin likes this.
  18. BCFCRob

    BCFCRob Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2011
    Messages:
    2,962
    Likes Received:
    852
    Completely agree that he shouldn't be backing LJ so much, you're right, but you also have a very rose-tinted view of Cotterill. His form was abysmal running up to his sacking as well but people forget that.
     
    #38
    oneforthebristolcity likes this.
  19. johngalleyfan2

    johngalleyfan2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2011
    Messages:
    14,770
    Likes Received:
    943
    There is no doubting that SC had 1 successful season, but his attempt at consolidating us in the championship was abysmal ...OK so has LJ's the big difference has been LJ has been prepared to try and change the operating system whereas SC 3-5-2 fullstop. And SC was showing signs he was not in control with various outbursts ..the most famous being on camera in front of spectators to a spectator. SL has maintained all along he wants a family supported club, and to be as SC was on his fateful day was the straw that ............
    Much to the annoyance of those that want him gone LJ's ability to stay calm, and OK BE REPETITIVE is hard to swallow. When you win or lose or draw there is only a couple of things you really have in your "delivery" box ... just 3 of about a dozen are
    we played well and ground out a point /deserved a point should have had a penalty/ and our winning scoreline of 2-1 was deserved
    team didn't follow the plan in the first half /second half/ when we were 2-0 up
    we were outplayed by a better team and think they were lucky to win by 2 goals/ we almost matched them but hit the woodwork twice/ so and so had an off day!
    etc etc
     
    #39
  20. banksyisourhero

    banksyisourhero Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2011
    Messages:
    9,541
    Likes Received:
    969

    Yea mostly by you! you haven't given one of them a sprinkling of support when they were under pressure.
     
    #40
    BCFCRob likes this.

Share This Page