Has Steve Lansdown Been Good For Bristol City?

[Spike]

Same old City fans, things go bad, we blame everyone we can... getting tired of reading some of the crap sprouted on here. Without SL we'd be Rovers.... I think that's the best and most simple way to put it.

[downendcity]

With the benefit of hindsight it's all too easy to see SL mistakes and know exactly what they would have done differently. I suspect that with hindsight, SL knows this too.

I read one post suggesting that he should have put his hand in his pocket to fund player puchases after the PO final but am sure read any number of times back then where SL said that funds were available to support GJ if he identified players he wanted to buy. The problem is that GJ either stayed too loyal to the old league 1 players or bought to much overpriced rubbish. Surely we would expect our chairman/owner to take the advice from his manager on football matters or would we all be happy for our unqualified owner to start getting involved in football matters and player purchases a la Abramovich?

As for AV, hands up everyone who could have foreseen the rubbish dump being classified as a village green? If SL has dealt wioth the whole AV project himself then he is to blame for the problems, but I suspect (and hope) that SL employed highly qualified and highly paid experts to handle to whole AV excercise, so can he be blamed for the planning problems that have arisen since?

He's not perfect but I reckon is probably a hell of a lot better than what we could have. With hindsight, and especially if he reads this forum, I suspect that SL often regrets ever getting involved with BCFC for all the thanks he gets.

[WTFiGO!?!]

Funnily enough, this very thread has appeared on their forum, one moron even gleefully speculating that should SL read this he will probably pull out of the club.

They really are a sad little bunch of jealous d1ckheads.

As for SL in answer to the OP, I personally think we are lucky to be in a posistion where we have a very wealthy backer who cares about the club. Some of his decisions may have been questionable but I trust him more than some 'Johnny Come Lately' middle eastern billionaire who wouldn't think twice about dropping the club in the s**t as soon as they got bored.

Well there's a surprise..

Hello, from a far inbreds , how's life treating ya? Wimbledon Saturday, is it? Aren't they the club who were at the very bottom of the entire football standings not so very long ago and have only been in existance in their current form for 10 years, or so? You must be so proud of yourselves facing such challanging opposition each week.

That's sure helped me put our problems into perspective! cheers......

[Murraysrightplum]

With the benefit of hindsight it's all too easy to see SL mistakes and know exactly what they would have done differently. I suspect that with hindsight, SL knows this too.

I read one post suggesting that he should have put his hand in his pocket to fund player puchases after the PO final but am sure read any number of times back then where SL said that funds were available to support GJ if he identified players he wanted to buy. The problem is that GJ either stayed too loyal to the old league 1 players or bought to much overpriced rubbish. Surely we would expect our chairman/owner to take the advice from his manager on football matters or would we all be happy for our unqualified owner to start getting involved in football matters and player purchases a la Abramovich?

As for AV, hands up everyone who could have foreseen the rubbish dump being classified as a village green? If SL has dealt wioth the whole AV project himself then he is to blame for the problems, but I suspect (and hope) that SL employed highly qualified and highly paid experts to handle to whole AV excercise, so can he be blamed for the planning problems that have arisen since?

He's not perfect but I reckon is probably a hell of a lot better than what we could have. With hindsight, and especially if he reads this forum, I suspect that SL often regrets ever getting involved with BCFC for all the thanks he gets.

Great post. Some fans have their heads up their backsides or must be closet Man Ure fans

[Monkeh]

Short and to the point. SL's tenure has been full of promises and broken dreams. His heart is in the right place. However the accumalation of massive debt the overriding of 1982 safeguards, and a complete lack of progression in a decade or so that he has been here, despite the money spent could be classed as a failure thus far, especially given that 'progress' on the field is neglible or at least will likely be come seasons end during that time

As for the we would be like 'the Rovers' we wouldnt. Our losses would be much less as has been described a zillion times on this forum and we would likely be more self sufficient and not in a blind panic over FFP as could have adjusted accordingly without having to make massive changes in order to get there.

what about off the field, new training ground investment in the coaching investment in the community investment in youth facilities new ground (ether vale or Ashton Gate redevlopment)?

Whith out him we'd have none of that

[bristolcity1981]

wtfigo!?! - no gas here my friend, funny how you can't have a negative opinion towards certain issues at the club & you get called GAS! Open your eyes to the bigger picture instead of just fobbing posts off as gas. It seem that it's almost a 50/50 split over lansdown. Opinions by supporters are aloud you know.

[Lew-T]

For me, in the grand scheme of things no.

Most of his tenure has been based on mistakes and cock ups, with fleeting highlights.

His vision for the clubs changes like the wind, but what stays the same throughout, is the rhetoric he fires out to apease the fans.

Bloke talks a good game, much like McInnes

This is spot on!

[Lew-T]

Same old City fans, things go bad, we blame everyone we can... getting tired of reading some of the crap sprouted on here. Without SL we'd be Rovers.... I think that's the best and most simple way to put it.

Same old City fans exaggerating to the max so they get their point across! Ridiculous

[Fiale]

Just because I am new to this forum & have strong views on SL doesn't make me gas. I have have these views for sometime. Any posts I have put on is simply trying to open people's eyes to the views I have & not once have I used offensive language toward any other user. To state that I support bristol rovers is pathetic & I have earned my right to say what the hell I want. 23 years of supporting this club, 14 years as a season ticket holder in the dolman, Countless always days. All I am asking is for people to open there eyes to what's really happening at OUR club.

I don't doubt that your a City fan, but I find your anti-Lansdown stance is based on bile, jealousy and hindsight. You call his son a monkey, attack him for not attending

funerals and fundraisers (as if it's normal for owners to turn up for such events) - and then a list of spurious things most of which are just opinion tinted with your own dislike of the man personally. That 50% of your topics are attacks against him, and most of your posts likewise, then your hardly a normal fan, chatting about the club, your a fan with an agenda against SL, trying to whip up more hatred on these boards...... so I think I will assign you to the "not worth listening to" list until you become more rational, calm and reign in your hatred.

[Murraysrightplum]

If it was simple, surely every team would be Man Utd or Barcelona. The reality is only one team can win the league each year and there are 20 or so other teams in the championship with much more money, experience, quality than us. This isn't football manager. Don't forget the majority of teams in the championship have played in the premier league and have premier league set ups and history. We have none of that and I believe this is what SL is trying to achieve now rather than the quick fix he was trying before.

[Natty Red]

yes he should of fenced it off I agree but at the time no one thought an ex dump would be considered, the fighting it was nothing to do with him it was Bristol City Council again beyond his control,

Fighting it a second time (the pending case in october) is with in his control

It could have been handled way better and it seems SL just dropped the ball in not seeing the opposition. Let's have it straight, Bristol is not Sport friendly nor is it a place that embraces change. I genuinely believe that if SL could spend more time here, WITH US, he would have seen the potential proverbial Banana skins.

What winds me up most are those in decision making places are mostly not even Bristolian and I think we should come first as residents. South Bristol now looking more impoverished by the day and no one seeming to give a toss.

I think that SL is guilty of being a fan rather than being more ruthless in a hands on approach really. I have no problems and will not criticise him but I do not feel the same about his Boy. It could be argued he is guilty of nepotism and has let go some time served and dyed in the Wool City Men. Alan Walsh just one example. I have no confidence in Lansdown Jnr at all.

There have been mistakes but no way is SL seeing is as a profit venture. I believe he is as passionate as any of is about us. Maybe that in itself is a problem ?

Onto our Gary, it is obviously too early to judge SoD but he does not inspire confidence in his media interviews. On the other hand I was chatting with Carey and he speaks highly of him, said he learned more in one week with him than in all the time Del Boy was here. If you remember GJ leaving it was done so very politely with joint interviews with SL. I don't think it entirely implausable. I had some of my best memories with him but he did lose it in buying players. I think he has learned a lot since. Just my opinion though.

I have not given up just yet though. We can stay up if we win all home games. I am not a quitter.

[TRL]

most of the people trying to block it don't live in the area

Doesn't matter though does it, it happened.

[BCFC_Dan]

Short and to the point. SL's tenure has been full of promises and broken dreams. His heart is in the right place. However the accumalation of massive debt the overriding of 1982 safeguards, and a complete lack of progression in a decade or so that he has been here, despite the money spent could be classed as a failure thus far, especially given that 'progress' on the field is neglible or at least will likely be come seasons end during that time

As for the we would be like 'the Rovers' we wouldnt. Our losses would be much less as has been described a zillion times on this forum and we would likely be more self sufficient and not in a blind panic over FFP as could have adjusted accordingly without having to make massive changes in order to get there.

You're making an assumption here. You're assuming that in the absence of Lansdown, the club would have been run by financially weak but prudent owners who would have achieved the same as Lansdown but without spending the money. This may well be the case as John Laycock certainly seemed to be a man of that ilk. However, the club was also approached during the last decade by Sam Hammam and Jon Macguire. I'm not confident that either of those two would have left the club in as healthy a state as it is now.

By all means point out the faults in the Lansdown regime. It's not hard to do and I'm sure he himself would acknowledge them. But please don't automatically assume that things would have been the same or better without him. They probably wouldn't.

[TRL]

But the land had planning permission. The only way to block it was with a ridiculous TVG application that we all know is a load of b*llocks. They either didn't see that coming or thought it wouldn't stand a chance in court. You really think SL didn't have people advising him on this?! The council made an almighty cock up...

Aye the only way it block it was.... So Either people have not had advisors, or they hired the wrong advisors. If the wrong ones then maybe SL and the silent partner should be going after them for the cost of the stadium.

That said it is easy enough to find out what to do when buying land and how to put a stop to certain complaints, its all online, even for the likes of a numbnutz like me to find. So that isn't really an excuse is it... Especially considering the the importance of the project

[BristolBEAT]

He does spend alot of it on the club who do you think covers the debts with loans? who do you think paid for the new training facilites? who do you think is paying the lions share for the new ground/redvlopment?

The debts are his own as the money is loaned to us, so he swallows that and has to underwrite it. Writing of ~40 mill essentially.

That's not going un-noticed by myself and others mind.

Training Facilities and a potential new ground are bricks and mortar, worth investing in. However success of the club is driven by on the field matters also. Could understand it if Lansdown was Nick Higgs just a chairman with nothing behind him.

But being worth almost a billion and a constant flow of profit would you just do nothing with ~500 million for the rest of your life.

To be fair Hargreaves is even worse. Worth about the same in money terms and only spends the money on his garden. What is the point of working hard for that sort of cash and never spending it in your life.

[friendlygas]

But surely the key here is that they are LOANS and he receives interest FROM THE CLUB for these. He is, I agree underwriting the debts himself but at the end of the day your club are 40 million in debt and if he did decide to get out you would be well and truly up shit creek (sorry for the pun!) He might be a fan (this is questionable) but I do wonder whether you fans (who are Bristol City FC) would prefer to be minus Steve Lansdown but in the position you were in prior to him taking over or with him and how you are now?

It interests me as obviously we don't have one benefactor with huge resources and quite a few of our supporters are always talking about our Board and is there somebody out there who would pour millions into us like Steve Lansdown has done? I would prefer to be with our current Board and our restrictions and hope that we can build a team without getting huge debts.

[Threshersleftboot]

Same old City fans, things go bad, we blame everyone we can... getting tired of reading some of the crap sprouted on here. Without SL we'd be Rovers.... I think that's the best and most simple way to put it.

Why would we be like Rovers there are plenty of teams in our league without the benefit of a wealthy owner pumping tens of millions of pounds in every season who are doing very well. I think this proves that having sound judgement (in football terms) is much more important than having money.

[Dolman Block B]

I really canot beleive anyone can critise SL or any of his family members for what is happening at the club at this moment in time.

It would not be even a topic of disscussion if we were half way up the league and the diggers were in over at Ashton Vale.

He has made fantasic efforts in trying to turn this football club into something special.

Where we have been without him?

Some really ought to get a life!!!!

[TRL]

I really canot beleive anyone can critise SL or any of his family members for what is happening at the club at this moment in time.

It would not be even a topic of disscussion if we were half way up the league and the diggers were in over at Ashton Vale.

He has made fantasic efforts in trying to turn this football club into something special.

Where we have been without him?

Some really ought to get a life!!!!

Not really Arn, if you look at my post history, a bit like ralphs, I have always been a dissenter. guess we see how he does things completely differently.

[downendcity]

Deleted

[downendcity]

Aye the only way it block it was.... So Either people have not had advisors, or they hired the wrong advisors. If the wrong ones then maybe SL and the silent partner should be going after them for the cost of the stadium.

That said it is easy enough to find out what to do when buying land and how to put a stop to certain complaints, its all online, even for the likes of a numbnutz like me to find. So that isn't really an excuse is it... Especially considering the the importance of the project

I had the telly on this morning - Portillo with his railways. They were at Portsmouth and looking a the forts Palmerston's government build in the Solent to counter the growing threat from the French Navy, at huge cost. In the 10 years it took to get them built, the French were no longer a threat, as a result of their Russian campaign.

Portillo explained that in a nutshell there lies the problem with politics. With hindsight Palmerston's government were criticised for the financial folly of building the forts. However, had they saved money and not built the forts, and the french had then invaded unoposed, they would have been criticised for not taken preventative action. At the time the government took the action based on all the prevailing information available to them. I suspect the French were not exactly forthcoming with their plans at that time.

It seems to me that as far as you are concerned, SL has been wrong with every decision, but that is only clear with hindsight.

What if his advisers had warned him of the potential problem of a village green application by the objectors and that with this information SL decided that it would be better not to go for a new stadium to avoid the wasted cost and delay, and instead to redevelop AG? I bet you would be now saying that SL doesn't care about the club, is only interested in saving his money but sould have invested in a new stadium, so that we can compete with the likes of Brighton, Cardiff etc, instead of saving his money and going for the cheap option.

Many regard that our greatest Chairman in recent times was Harry Dolman, as he oversaw our elevation to the top flight. However, HD and his board also agreed the long term contracts to the AG 8 that precipated the clubs demise and almost extinction. At the time, and with all the prevailing concerns regarding freedom of contract he took what he thought was the right course of action to protect the club interests, but with hindsight it now appears to have been a financially reckless decision.

With hindsight I would have been a millionnaire, but in reality and as a result of decisions made with prevailing information at the time, i will probably be working into my 70's. But then any numbnutz could have known better with hindsiight - including me!

[TRL]

I had the telly on this morning - Portillo with his railways. They were at Portsmouth and looking a the forts Palmerston's government build in the Solent to counter the growing threat from the French Navy, at huge cost. In the 10 years it took to get them built, the French were no longer a threat, as a result of their Russian campaign.

Portillo explained that in a nutshell there lies the problem with politics. With hindsight Palmerston's government were criticised for the financial folly of building the forts. However, had they saved money and not built the forts, and the french had then invaded unoposed, they would have been criticised for not taken preventative action. At the time the government took the action based on all the prevailing information available to them. I suspect the French were not exactly forthcoming with their plans at that time.

It seems to me that as far as you are concerned, SL has been wrong with every decision, but that is only clear with hindsight.

What if his advisers had warned him of the potential problem of a village green application by the objectors and that with this information SL decided that it would be better not to go for a new stadium to avoid the wasted cost and delay, and instead to redevelop AG? I bet you would be now saying that SL doesn't care about the club, is only interested in saving his money but sould have invested in a new stadium, so that we can compete with the likes of Brighton, Cardiff etc, instead of saving his money and going for the cheap option.

Many regard that our greatest Chairman in recent times was Harry Dolman, as he oversaw our elevation to the top flight. However, HD and his board also agreed the long term contracts to the AG 8 that precipated the clubs demise and almost extinction. At the time, and with all the prevailing concerns regarding freedom of contract he took what he thought was the right course of action to protect the club interests, but with hindsight it now appears to have been a financially reckless decision.

With hindsight I would have been a millionnaire, but in reality and as a result of decisions made with prevailing information at the time, i will probably be working into my 70's. But then any numbnutz could have known better with hindsiight - including me!

I have stated that SL is a veruy poor decision and strategy maker for the club. I have never stated that he was cheap and saving his own money. I have intimated that he may have been wiser spending more money when going for promotion, but that is the only time I have ever mentioned not spending money.

In a Nutshell. SL has lots of good ideas, which he changes to much. He doesn't stick to any strategy and lumbers from one idea to another, Some through his choosing, some through external influences. there is little structure or planning to what he has done with this club. Hence the shambles we find ourselves in. I am tempted to list a whole list of cock ups against successes. But I is probably wasted as I am coming from a polar opposite to those who think he is great.

[Monkeh]

Yeah, I'am making assumption as it's hypothetical's time as opposed to what we got Hammam, wasnt a serious offer iirc, just a speculative punt and Maguire's was a chancer with no finance Loans against future success iirc. Without reading through it properly there is a thread in Classics, here which should cover everything iirc.

We had a debt of 1-2 Million a decade ago! Compare and contrast, with what we have now

Well, as mentioned before about the 1982 safeguards, its very likely that we would have cut our cloth accordingly because, we had to and didnt want to overspend getting back in to a mess that nearly wiped us out before.

10 years ago wages for the avg footballer were about 100% less as well

[BristolBEAT]

But surely the key here is that they are LOANS and he receives interest FROM THE CLUB for these. He is, I agree underwriting the debts himself but at the end of the day your club are 40 million in debt and if he did decide to get out you would be well and truly up shit creek (sorry for the pun!) He might be a fan (this is questionable) but I do wonder whether you fans (who are Bristol City FC) would prefer to be minus Steve Lansdown but in the position you were in prior to him taking over or with him and how you are now?

It interests me as obviously we don't have one benefactor with huge resources and quite a few of our supporters are always talking about our Board and is there somebody out there who would pour millions into us like Steve Lansdown has done? I would prefer to be with our current Board and our restrictions and hope that we can build a team without getting huge debts.

Gas,

1. Underwriting the debts, the "40 million" are essentially all of Lansdown's loans. So..?

2. Lansdown's investment was used prominently in the GJ area whereby millions was wasted on very poor loan players. Anyone have a stat of how many I would guess 25. I don't like it when Gas heads, not necessarily yourself, accuse us of having a billionaire and moaning and getting loads of tops players. Yes a billionaire, but a billionaire who barely spends.

[GodEmperor Palpatine]

It could have been handled way better and it seems SL just dropped the ball in not seeing the opposition. Let's have it straight, Bristol is not Sport friendly nor is it a place that embraces change. I genuinely believe that if SL could spend more time here, WITH US, he would have seen the potential proverbial Banana skins.

What winds me up most are those in decision making places are mostly not even Bristolian and I think we should come first as residents. South Bristol now looking more impoverished by the day and no one seeming to give a toss.

I think that SL is guilty of being a fan rather than being more ruthless in a hands on approach really. I have no problems and will not criticise him but I do not feel the same about his Boy. It could be argued he is guilty of nepotism and has let go some time served and dyed in the Wool City Men. Alan Walsh just one example. I have no confidence in Lansdown Jnr at all.

There have been mistakes but no way is SL seeing is as a profit venture. I believe he is as passionate as any of is about us. Maybe that in itself is a problem ?

Onto our Gary, it is obviously too early to judge SoD but he does not inspire confidence in his media interviews. On the other hand I was chatting with Carey and he speaks highly of him, said he learned more in one week with him than in all the time Del Boy was here. If you remember GJ leaving it was done so very politely with joint interviews with SL. I don't think it entirely implausable. I had some of my best memories with him but he did lose it in buying players. I think he has learned a lot since. Just my opinion though.

I have not given up just yet though. We can stay up if we win all home games. I am not a quitter.

Said this publicly also, however interesting that he said the same thing when Del Boy started and he learned more in a week than he did with KM.

[Nogbad the Bad]

Many regard that our greatest Chairman in recent times was Harry Dolman, as he oversaw our elevation to the top flight. However, HD and his board also agreed the long term contracts to the AG 8 that precipated the clubs demise and almost extinction. At the time, and with all the prevailing concerns regarding freedom of contract he took what he thought was the right course of action to protect the club interests, but with hindsight it now appears to have been a financially reckless decision.

Harry Dolman wasn't Chairman when City got promoted, or involved in handing out the long term contracts.

He resigned as Chairman In 1974. He had wanted Alan Dicks to be replaced by assistant John Sillett, and told fellow directors Dicks should get no more than a one year contract. His offer to resign on this matter was accepted, apparently to his great surprise, and Robert Hobbs became chairman.

A position of Club President was created for Dolman,( now held by his widow Marina) and although he lived to see promotion, he passed away in '77, very early in our Div.1 days and holding an honoury position where he would have had no say in contracts.

[BristolBEAT]

I really canot beleive anyone can critise SL or any of his family members for what is happening at the club at this moment in time.

It would not be even a topic of disscussion if we were half way up the league and the diggers were in over at Ashton Vale.

He has made fantasic efforts in trying to turn this football club into something special.

Where we have been without him?

Some really ought to get a life!!!!

Don't believe anyone is making any attacks on anyone or not appreciating Lansdown, well I am certainly not.

But when Lansdown makes the open decision at the start of the decision, which he did! to not invest any more money in the team. Then the team suffers. Lansdown is his own person, it is his money he can do what he likes with it. But if you were worth a billion and an constantly yearly profit of £94 million would you just not spend it in your life? Currently Lansdown doesn't.

[Monkeh]

Gas,

1. Underwriting the debts, the "40 million" are essentially all of Lansdown's loans. So..?

2. Lansdown's investment was used prominently in the GJ area whereby millions was wasted on very poor loan players. Anyone have a stat of how many I would guess 25. I don't like it when Gas heads, not necessarily yourself, accuse us of having a billionaire and moaning and getting loads of tops players. Yes a billionaire, but a billionaire who barely spends.

but if he didn't underright the debt the club would fold,

Our turnover doesn't match out out goings because wages in football have gone out of control its not just this club but 88 or so of the 92 league clubs all they way down to tier 7 or 8 that run at a loss and require some one to underight,

the debt figure may be 40 million 400 million or 4 million it doesn matter what matters is we have some one to cover that if we didn't and it was the bank we owed any sort of money too then we'd be like oh so many football clubs in recent years that have gone into administration,

with out him thats what will happen even when he wasn't here as ralph points out we were losing money but that money was owed porbbily to the bank not the board and the bank at the time could of called in the debt and we'd be unable to pay it

[downendcity]

Harry Dolman wasn't Chairman when City got promoted, or involved in handing out the long term contracts.

He resigned as Chairman In 1974. He had wanted Alan Dicks to be replaced by assistant John Sillett, and told fellow directors Dicks should get no more than a one year contract. His offer to resign on this matter was accepted, apparently to his great surprise, and Robert Hobbs became chairman.

A position of Club President was created for Dolman,( now held by his widow Marina) and although he lived to see promotion, he passed away in '77, very early in our Div.1 days and holding an honoury position where he would have had no say in contracts.

Thanks for the correction Noggers. Age has obviously affected my memory more than I thought.

Notwithstanding that it didn't involve HD, the board at the time did agree the long term contracts in order to protect the clubs interests and if I'm right ( which is now highly questionable!) this was after we lost Gary Collier under freedom of contract rules and wanted to avid the same thing happeing with other players. At the time they thought they were taking the right decision, and for the right reasons. With hindsight it almost ruined the club.

[NickJ]

Look at this clown and nickjs post history and you will see 90% all bashing

**** off to another club you sad sad people

We wouldn't of been in this league in the first place with our him

Fact

We wouldn't be getting a new or redeveloped ground

Fact

We wouldn't have a youth or training ground

Fact

I'll take it as a compliment your stalking my posts, however you are wrong.

On this thread for example here is the comment by another poster I said I agreed with:

I have absolutely no doubt that he has the drive, ambition and wealth to bring success and his heart is the right place with regards to the club. The early GJ years especially 2006/7 and 2007/8 were great times, unfortunately followed by a serious losing of the plot until GJ went (not really SL's fault).

with the caveat that IMO SL should have as the ultimate boss stood up to Johnson who was clearly getting carried away with his own self importance. Had SL done that he, GJ, and all of us might be a darn sight happier with where Bristol City are right now. But SL is human and we all make mistakes. And really, thats all thats being discussed on here, mistakes.

If you would like to describe people as "clowns" and "sad" thats up to you but again you are incorrect with all of your alleged "Facts".

Ten years ago there existed planning permission to redevelop Ashton Gate, at a cost which at that time was affordable based on the relatively healthy balance sheet at the time - £10m positive with an asset available as security valued at £20m. Now thats what I call a fact.

I cant dispute another of your alleged "facts", that without SL we wouldnt be in the league we are now, because its impossible to prove or disprove - and incidentally cannot therefore be "fact" one way or the other. History however suggests that by now you would almost certainly be incorect.

Still I suppose its a slight improvement on another claim you made previously, that without SL we wouldnt exist at all.

Would we be better off without SL at the helm? Probably not but at the end of the day this club belongs not to Steve but to all of us, and we all have a right to question decisions. I dont think Steve would deny anybody that right so long as its done in a civilised way; sometimes passionately held views spill over into comments which go beyond the mark and I will accept I have probably been guilty of that, at times when I shouldnt be posting and I suspect that applies to others also.

My view has always diverged from Steve's and what appeared at one time to be the majority view, that we should not move to Ashton Vale. I also disagreed with the claim that Ashton Gate was not a financially viable option.

Interestingly, since the announcement that Ashton Gate redevelopment was once again being considered, those in favour of that seem to have - with respect to them - crawled out of the woodwork: the threads at the time of the announcement indicated a 50:50 split. It is also interesting that there is now an implicit acceptance by the board that Ashton Gate is financially viable, a complete backdown on the message previously being given - a change of heart which hasn't been explained.

I also think that the current board of directors, appointed by Steve, is entirely inappropriate. I suppose one way of explaining my position on this issue would be to ask Steve, would he appoint a 27 year old to the board of Hargreaves Lansdown let alone as Managing Director and would he in his wildest dreams envisage a board of directors at Hargreaves consisting entirely of personnnel with no direct experience of the financial services industry.

That is not criticism for its own sake, I would like to think these are pertinent and valid questions. We are all passionate Bristol City supporters otherwise we wouldnt be on here and I do not think it is unreasonable to question the way that aspects of the club is run. The alternative is called a dictatorship and Steve doesnt strike me as the sort of chap who would deliberately set out to act in such a way and as such I would like to think that questioining in a responsible way would be welcomed by him.