Jump to content
IGNORED

How big a club are we really?


Meh

Recommended Posts

Maybe a perspective from a non-City follower is called for.   Are Bristol City a big club ?   In the simplest terms, No

Don't take offence or nothing but probably on a plateau with Oxford or Swindon.   I think the team won the FA Cup back in the early 1900's but more than a century has passed and really, you've been up to next to nothing in the time since.   May have been a promotion from the third or second division in the years since, but nothing substantial.  

If I look over to the South-West there's teams such as Plymouth, Cardiff, Exeter, yourselves and Bristol Rovers, and of the names mentioned I'd pick the Welsh side as bigger stature.    Some would argue what even gives a team the right to call themselves big or established ?    Odd thing is, we've (Ipswich) been Champions of England, runners up in the top flight two or three times, won the FA Cup and a European trophy - not to mention providing the English national team with their two most successful managers - and we're still a small team that's largely overlooked by many and probably on a plateau with Charlton Athletic or Sunderland.   

We had a similar debate on our official club forum about six or seven years ago about "who are the big teams of the second league" and while there was considerable discussion and a range of opinion, the general consensus at the end of it all was we simply didn't deserve to be included as one of the bigger names of the division.   

Once again some will argue what makes a team big or provides the right to call themselves such, but unfortunately City are unable to label themselves one of the bigger names of the game.    Won't say ever - that would be too short-sighted - but you're following a team probably established in the latter part of the 19th Century that simply hasn't accomplished near enough (in the time since) to warrant inclusion.     

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Southend Blue said:

Maybe a perspective from a non-City follower is called for.   Are Bristol City a big club ?   In the simplest terms, No

Don't take offence or nothing but probably on a plateau with Oxford or Swindon.   I think the team won the FA Cup back in the early 1900's but more than a century has passed and really, you've been up to next to nothing in the time since.   May have been a promotion from the third or second division in the years since, but nothing substantial.  

If I look over to the South-West there's teams such as Plymouth, Cardiff, Exeter, yourselves and Bristol Rovers, and of the names mentioned I'd pick the Welsh side as bigger stature.    Some would argue what even gives a team the right to call themselves big or established ?    Odd thing is, we've (Ipswich) been Champions of England, runners up in the top flight two or three times, won the FA Cup and a European trophy - not to mention providing the English national team with their two most successful managers - and we're still a small team that's largely overlooked by many and probably on a plateau with Charlton Athletic or Sunderland.   

We had a similar debate on our official club forum about six or seven years ago about "who are the big teams of the second league" and while there was considerable discussion and a range of opinion, the general consensus at the end of it all was we simply didn't deserve to be included as one of the bigger names of the division.   

Once again some will argue what makes a team big or provides the right to call themselves such, but unfortunately City are unable to label themselves one of the bigger names of the game.    Won't say ever - that would be too short-sighted - but you're following a team probably established in the latter part of the 19th Century that simply hasn't accomplished near enough (in the time since) to warrant inclusion.     

 

 

YOU TAKE THAT BACK

 

 

 

We've never won an FA Cup ;) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Tipps69 said:

As I've said elsewhere in the thread, I don't know the in's & out's of the FFP rules but I know that stadium improvements & transfer incomings & outgoings have a bearing on it, so on that basis, the two years or so of stadium improvements & the fact that we must of made a profit from our transfer dealings (JK's fee plus bonuses from Adomah's & Bolasie's deals) & the added income from the increased crowds  must mean we have a bit of room to loosen the purse strings?

Plus, was there not some sort of benefit with regards to FFP from 'Bristol Sport' being involved in the club?

We must have some 'wiggle room', how did Wolves manage to spend so much last season? £12.75m on Costa, £6.8m on Cavaleiro, £3.4m on Saiss, £2.7 on Bodvarsson, £1.8m on Oniangue, £1.7m on Gladon, £1.2m on Marshall plus numerous free transfers & loans totalling just over £30m!! While only gaining just over £2m on transfer incomings!!

Aston Villa spent £72m!! And received £39m!!

We seemingly spent just over £10m last season & brought in £12m but that's without the fee's being divulged for Agard, O'Donnell, Williams & Burns or the sell-on money from Adomah & Bolasie!

We have never invested a ridiculous amount on players.

As I say, we must have some 'wiggle room'?

I am not sure where you are getting your figures from but Aston Villas income (parachute payment?) will be much more than the figure quoted, and they will have not released figures for this season and display how they will work towards working to comply with FFP. Wolves have a higher income than Bristol City and have for a significant period - They can spend more.  

Bristol City have lost money for close to two decades. Your definition of silly is different to mine there have been seasons where for every pound earned City spent two pounds forty (140% past income), that is hardly trifling. It is massive loss.

I don't think I would use the word wiggle either for a club that has unpaid loans on of circa twenty million pounds within its accounts, and concerns raised about the viability of the business in the summary only a few seasons ago.

None of the above means Mr Lansdown put BCFC at risk, he did not. It does highlight that BCFC is hardly affluent. Accounts in future will be interesting reading to see if BCFC has finally made even one penny in profit.

It seems hardly fair to Mr Lansdown to feel he should effectively give away (he cannot) forty million pounds in two seasons, he has already spent forty five million pounds on the stadium, turned tens of millions of pounds of debt into equity and loans to sustain the club.

Your twenty million pounds should be a far humbler sum, some would say the FC should now be standing financially on its own feet without Mr Lansdown ladling in yet more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Tipps69 said:

The trouble with a 'Tom Ince' or 'Danny Ings' signing is that we'd have to convince them that we aren't 'little old Bristol City' who have done very little over the years in the top two divisions.

By that, I mean we'd have to convince them that we are actually trying to get somewhere & that we are going to sign another 6 / 7 / 8 players of the same caliber or better & to do that it's going to cost us £50m plus??

Much the same as when we were supposedly serious about signing Gayle & Gray, it's all good offering the transfer fee but you have to convince players of that caliber that they have a reason to join us, that we are serious about getting promotion because players of that caliber want to play in the Premier League not flirting with relegation.

Just for us to get on a level footing with the likes of Sheffield Wednesday, Derby & Middlesbrough, we have to upgrade possibly 8 or 9 of our players & pay the wages to go with it but we will never do that in one season!

We'll go with the option of spending £2m on a couple of players in the hope that they suddenly become £10m players but are still on peanuts compared to the top clubs in this division.

There comes a time when we have to bite the bullet & pay the going rate if we are serious about getting out of this division via promotion rather than relegation, either we pay Championship quality players the going rate (to stop us losing the likes of Flint & Bryan) or we sign the best players from Italy's, Spain's, Portugal's, Germany's & France's 2nd division & hope they come good but that comes with no guarantees & will probably take time to come to fruition.

We still have a core of League One players & sadly they haven't really progressed us as a club & while a couple have improved, the majority haven't improved enough to move us as a club forward & at the rate we are moving it will probably be 2040 by the time we are ready to compete at the top end of this division.

I know it's easy to say because it isn't my money but this blueprint needs to be binned & SL needs to hand over say £20m now (for four or five players) & the same again next summer, that should then see the quality of our team / squad improve dramatically & put us up there with the better teams in this division.

But we also need to make our statement of intent known to the players (current & potential ones) so that they know we are serious in building a quality team / squad rather than them just thinking that one signing is all we are going to make (Gayle / Gray).

But we won't do that, we will continue to get what we pay for, paying £1m - £2m per player may seem big for some of our fans but it's nothing nowadays & look where it's got us? We have players considered not yet ready for the standard we are playing at!! So sign players that are ready for the standard we are playing at & we will start attracting better players & it will become easier to do instead of it becoming a battle to sign any real quality!

A worry I also have is how reliant we will become on loan signings from Premier League clubs, while Tammy was a huge success it still only means we have these players for one season & then they go back to their parent club & they benefit from any financial success!! I don't mind the odd loan youngster but it sounds like we are about to take on more than just one 'potential gem' & just how reliant will we be on someone else's players??

The whole squad needs upgrading with the exception of maybe one or two first team players & another one or two potential players but we tend to sign players who improve on what we have on the bench & not what we have regularly in the first eleven!

For me, we are still a small club, some players & supporters don't even know who Bristol City are or even where we are in the country & we need to do something to improve that perception of us!

I think the issue with new signings is not with transfer fees.

As we saw a couple of seasons ago SL was prepared to back SC when we put in bids for at £7m or so for Gayle and Gray, so I am sure Sl would be prepared to back more substantial signings now.

The problem lies with the salaries that players at that price tag would demand. Although our revenues will hopefully have improved since the stadium development was completed, we are still relatively small fry financially in the championship. FFP really bites in limiting the amount of losses an owner can cover and wages are the biggest budget item on the expenditure side of the profit and loss account and it's the wage bill that will be the most limiting financial factor when considering new signings.

Villa could not only afford Kodjia's transfer fee, more importantly they could also afford the wages that went with a £15m price tag, as they enjoy parachute payments. I read on her suggestions we should consider going for Jordan Rhodes and SL could well stretch to the £9/10m transfer fee, but the nigh on £50,000 per week wages that was suggested he would want would blow our budget. 

This is why the stadium redevelopment was crucial to our long term plans. FFP rules do not stop an owner his money investing in a stadium. The new stadium will improve our revenues, both from increased attendances and match day ancillary sales and corporate business but also from non match day revenues as a result of increased use of stadium facilities commercially. The extra revenue from the stadium can then be used to fund higher player wages without compromising FFP, at which point we can afford better players than our current wage budget allows.

When SL talks about the club becoming financially self sufficient, I don't think he's talking him no longer putting his hand in his pocket. I think he means getting to the position where the club generates sufficient income so that it can complete within the financial rules, as it's the financial rules that limit what he can do for the club. It also ties in with the long term plan, as we have to tailor or player signings to our current financial position, but as the financial position improves we can go for better players because we can afford higher salaries.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Tipps69 said:

The trouble with a 'Tom Ince' or 'Danny Ings' signing is that we'd have to convince them that we aren't 'little old Bristol City' who have done very little over the years in the top two divisions.

By that, I mean we'd have to convince them that we are actually trying to get somewhere & that we are going to sign another 6 / 7 / 8 players of the same caliber or better & to do that it's going to cost us £50m plus??

Much the same as when we were supposedly serious about signing Gayle & Gray, it's all good offering the transfer fee but you have to convince players of that caliber that they have a reason to join us, that we are serious about getting promotion because players of that caliber want to play in the Premier League not flirting with relegation.

Just for us to get on a level footing with the likes of Sheffield Wednesday, Derby & Middlesbrough, we have to upgrade possibly 8 or 9 of our players & pay the wages to go with it but we will never do that in one season!

We'll go with the option of spending £2m on a couple of players in the hope that they suddenly become £10m players but are still on peanuts compared to the top clubs in this division.

There comes a time when we have to bite the bullet & pay the going rate if we are serious about getting out of this division via promotion rather than relegation, either we pay Championship quality players the going rate (to stop us losing the likes of Flint & Bryan) or we sign the best players from Italy's, Spain's, Portugal's, Germany's & France's 2nd division & hope they come good but that comes with no guarantees & will probably take time to come to fruition.

We still have a core of League One players & sadly they haven't really progressed us as a club & while a couple have improved, the majority haven't improved enough to move us as a club forward & at the rate we are moving it will probably be 2040 by the time we are ready to compete at the top end of this division.

I know it's easy to say because it isn't my money but this blueprint needs to be binned & SL needs to hand over say £20m now (for four or five players) & the same again next summer, that should then see the quality of our team / squad improve dramatically & put us up there with the better teams in this division.

But we also need to make our statement of intent known to the players (current & potential ones) so that they know we are serious in building a quality team / squad rather than them just thinking that one signing is all we are going to make (Gayle / Gray).

But we won't do that, we will continue to get what we pay for, paying £1m - £2m per player may seem big for some of our fans but it's nothing nowadays & look where it's got us? We have players considered not yet ready for the standard we are playing at!! So sign players that are ready for the standard we are playing at & we will start attracting better players & it will become easier to do instead of it becoming a battle to sign any real quality!

A worry I also have is how reliant we will become on loan signings from Premier League clubs, while Tammy was a huge success it still only means we have these players for one season & then they go back to their parent club & they benefit from any financial success!! I don't mind the odd loan youngster but it sounds like we are about to take on more than just one 'potential gem' & just how reliant will we be on someone else's players??

The whole squad needs upgrading with the exception of maybe one or two first team players & another one or two potential players but we tend to sign players who improve on what we have on the bench & not what we have regularly in the first eleven!

For me, we are still a small club, some players & supporters don't even know who Bristol City are or even where we are in the country & we need to do something to improve that perception of us!

you proposing now Mr Lansdown is getting the losses down he goes back to losing ten, eleven, twelve millions pounds a season?

how is it all going to be covered?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Cowshed said:

I am not sure where you are getting your figures from but Aston Villas income (parachute payment?) will be much more than the figure quoted, and they will have not released figures for this season and display how they will work towards working to comply with FFP. Wolves have a higher income than Bristol City and have for a significant period - They can spend more.  

Bristol City have lost money for close to two decades. Your definition of silly is different to mine there have been seasons where for every pound earned City spent two pounds forty (140% past income), that is hardly trifling. It is massive loss.

I don't think I would use the word wiggle either for a club that has unpaid loans on of circa twenty million pounds within its accounts, and concerns raised about the viability of the business in the summary only a few seasons ago.

None of the above means Mr Lansdown put BCFC at risk, he did not. It does highlight that BCFC is hardly affluent. Accounts in future will be interesting reading to see if BCFC has finally made even one penny in profit.

It seems hardly fair to Mr Lansdown to feel he should effectively give away (he cannot) forty million pounds in two seasons, he has already spent forty five million pounds on the stadium, turned tens of millions of pounds of debt into equity and loans to sustain the club.

Your twenty million pounds should be a far humbler sum, some would say the FC should now be standing financially on its own feet without Mr Lansdown ladling in yet more.

We spent £10m on transfers last season & considering that JK left late in the summer window &  I'd assume that we didn't expect his money or the money from the sell-on's of AA or YB to come in, so we were willing to spend a bit with no thought towards income, so having now pocketed an unexpected £15m or so, is it beyond the realms of possibility that we may spend a bit more this season?

LJ has stated that he doesn't see us going crazy like last season in terms of how many players come in but he'd still like 3 or 4 so instead of buying players that improve the bench, buy players that increase the quality of the first team NOW.

1 hour ago, Trueredsupporte said:

you proposing now Mr Lansdown is getting the losses down he goes back to losing ten, eleven, twelve millions pounds a season?

how is it all going to be covered?

But by spending £10m on predominantly squad players, it's just helping spread the debt over 5 years as we constantly have to improve the squad, spend a little bit more on 3 or 4 quality players & we won't have to replace them for 3 years or so & it will raise the quality throughout the club.

Spending £2m or £3m max isn't getting us anywhere & if anything it's making us stagnate while most other Championship clubs are improving!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Tipps69 said:

We spent £10m on transfers last season & considering that JK left late in the summer window &  I'd assume that we didn't expect his money or the money from the sell-on's of AA or YB to come in, so we were willing to spend a bit with no thought towards income, so having now pocketed an unexpected £15m or so, is it beyond the realms of possibility that we may spend a bit more this season?

 

 

A little more is not what you implied in your post. You quoted forty million pounds over two seasons.

I know it's easy to say because it isn't my money but this blueprint needs to be binned & SL needs to hand over say £20m now (for four or five players) & the same again next summer.

You appear to desire that Mr Lansdown put in his own wealth past BCFC's operating costs, beyond what FFP allows and do not indicate how these sums will be serviced (equity?).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, downendcity said:

I think the issue with new signings is not with transfer fees.

As we saw a couple of seasons ago SL was prepared to back SC when we put in bids for at £7m or so for Gayle and Gray, so I am sure Sl would be prepared to back more substantial signings now.

The problem lies with the salaries that players at that price tag would demand. Although our revenues will hopefully have improved since the stadium development was completed, we are still relatively small fry financially in the championship. FFP really bites in limiting the amount of losses an owner can cover and wages are the biggest budget item on the expenditure side of the profit and loss account and it's the wage bill that will be the most limiting financial factor when considering new signings.

Villa could not only afford Kodjia's transfer fee, more importantly they could also afford the wages that went with a £15m price tag, as they enjoy parachute payments. I read on her suggestions we should consider going for Jordan Rhodes and SL could well stretch to the £9/10m transfer fee, but the nigh on £50,000 per week wages that was suggested he would want would blow our budget. 

This is why the stadium redevelopment was crucial to our long term plans. FFP rules do not stop an owner his money investing in a stadium. The new stadium will improve our revenues, both from increased attendances and match day ancillary sales and corporate business but also from non match day revenues as a result of increased use of stadium facilities commercially. The extra revenue from the stadium can then be used to fund higher player wages without compromising FFP, at which point we can afford better players than our current wage budget allows.

When SL talks about the club becoming financially self sufficient, I don't think he's talking him no longer putting his hand in his pocket. I think he means getting to the position where the club generates sufficient income so that it can complete within the financial rules, as it's the financial rules that limit what he can do for the club. It also ties in with the long term plan, as we have to tailor or player signings to our current financial position, but as the financial position improves we can go for better players because we can afford higher salaries.

 

 

 

 

trouble is the old chicken and egg situation, to generate more money we need to be successful, to be successful we will have to spend more money. (or get very lucky) not sure what the answer is, the old cliché you have to speculate to accumulate springs to mind. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Cowshed said:

A little more is not what you implied in your post. You quoted forty million pounds over two seasons.

I know it's easy to say because it isn't my money but this blueprint needs to be binned & SL needs to hand over say £20m now (for four or five players) & the same again next summer.

You appear to desire that Mr Lansdown put in his own wealth past BCFC's operating costs, beyond what FFP allows and do not indicate how these sums will be serviced (equity?).

'Say £20m'!! Not exactly £20m!!

We have gone up a level in football & are now competing against clubs spending a lot more than we are while we continue to purchase players at the same value as we were doing in 1998 when we signed Thorpe, Akinbiyi & Andersen, that's 19 years ago & we seemingly expect to get quality players while the going rate has dramatically increased!!

I've explained where the money comes from, we spent £10m on 19 players last season without expecting any income from JK, AA & YB, so instead of spending 'say £10m on 19 players, spend say £10m or so (maybe £20m as we have had the unexpected income from JK, AA, YB, LA, WB, DW & LF come in) on 3 or 4 better quality players!!

We also now have a season of 'say 20,000' fans coming through the gate on a regular basis plus the extra tv money & the extra sponsorship money (assuming that we aren't still getting what we were in 1998)?!?

Our transfer record stands at less than £3m!! Even the average clubs at this level are spending that on squad players, not their star players!!

Even going back to the 2008 play-off season, come January when we were very much still in the running for automatic promotion, a couple of players coming in for 'say £2m or so' back then could of given us the impotence to push on & at the very least would of meant that we wouldn't of gone into those play-offs with a bunch of 'has-been journeymen' but again, we went for the cheap option & look where it got us!!

There comes a time when you have to 'speculate to accumulate', we now have on average 5,000 more people coming through the turnstiles & all these great corporate facilities meaning that we should have more income than ever before & who knows, with a bit of speculating on the clubs behalf, that average of 5,000 extra fans could become 10,000 (as was shown with the last game of the season) or are we going to carry on playing in a stadium where the top level of a spanking new stand will stay unused?

Has the quality of our squad really improved that much from our League One days or even from 1998 (when we were spending £1m+ on players)? I'd say it hasn't dramatically improved if at all & look what happened to that squad around 1998!!

We have to move with the times, this current blueprint has seen us constantly yo-yo between League One & Championship football, let's move this club with such ambition (as we constantly get reminded) forward & start competing properly at the level we are at!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, pillred said:

trouble is the old chicken and egg situation, to generate more money we need to be successful, to be successful we will have to spend more money. (or get very lucky) not sure what the answer is, the old cliché you have to speculate to accumulate springs to mind. 

I think we are speculating, but are doing so within what we can afford and the financial rules allow and it's not really transfer fees that are our biggest problem.

Crucially, and as I mentioned in my post, I suspect that Sl would be happy to back a substantial purchase - say £5m or more- providing the wages that player would demand are within our budget. Financial rules limit the level of losses an owner can cover each season, but as our revenues improve since the stadium rebuild, more match day revenue and importantly no match day revenue then our wage budget can grow and we can better afford those better players.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Tipps69 said:

'Say £20m'!! Not exactly £20m!!

We have gone up a level in football & are now competing against clubs spending a lot more than we are while we continue to purchase players at the same value as we were doing in 1998 when we signed Thorpe, Akinbiyi & Andersen, that's 19 years ago & we seemingly expect to get quality players while the going rate has dramatically increased!!

I've explained where the money comes from, we spent £10m on 19 players last season without expecting any income from JK, AA & YB, so instead of spending 'say £10m on 19 players, spend say £10m or so (maybe £20m as we have had the unexpected income from JK, AA, YB, LA, WB, DW & LF come in) on 3 or 4 better quality players!!

We also now have a season of 'say 20,000' fans coming through the gate on a regular basis plus the extra tv money & the extra sponsorship money (assuming that we aren't still getting what we were in 1998)?!?

Our transfer record stands at less than £3m!! Even the average clubs at this level are spending that on squad players, not their star players!!

Even going back to the 2008 play-off season, come January when we were very much still in the running for automatic promotion, a couple of players coming in for 'say £2m or so' back then could of given us the impotence to push on & at the very least would of meant that we wouldn't of gone into those play-offs with a bunch of 'has-been journeymen' but again, we went for the cheap option & look where it got us!!

 

BIB. That obviously explains our "limp" finish to the season! :)

Regarding your other comments, I don't think it is the transfer fees that is the problem. SL could easily support a £10m signing, but that player would probably demand wages that we could not afford within our wages budget and that's the area where financial rules bite and SL's financial hands are tied.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Tipps69 said:

'Say £20m'!! Not exactly £20m!!

We have gone up a level in football & are now competing against clubs spending a lot more than we are while we continue to purchase players at the same value as we were doing in 1998 when we signed Thorpe, Akinbiyi & Andersen, that's 19 years ago & we seemingly expect to get quality players while the going rate has dramatically increased!!

I've explained where the money comes from, we spent £10m on 19 players last season without expecting any income from JK, AA & YB, so instead of spending 'say £10m on 19 players, spend say £10m or so (maybe £20m as we have had the unexpected income from JK, AA, YB, LA, WB, DW & LF come in) on 3 or 4 better quality players!!

We also now have a season of 'say 20,000' fans coming through the gate on a regular basis plus the extra tv money & the extra sponsorship money (assuming that we aren't still getting what we were in 1998)?!?

Our transfer record stands at less than £3m!! Even the average clubs at this level are spending that on squad players, not their star players!!

Even going back to the 2008 play-off season, come January when we were very much still in the running for automatic promotion, a couple of players coming in for 'say £2m or so' back then could of given us the impotence to push on & at the very least would of meant that we wouldn't of gone into those play-offs with a bunch of 'has-been journeymen' but again, we went for the cheap option & look where it got us!!

There comes a time when you have to 'speculate to accumulate', we now have on average 5,000 more people coming through the turnstiles & all these great corporate facilities meaning that we should have more income than ever before & who knows, with a bit of speculating on the clubs behalf, that average of 5,000 extra fans could become 10,000 (as was shown with the last game of the season) or are we going to carry on playing in a stadium where the top level of a spanking new stand will stay unused?

Has the quality of our squad really improved that much from our League One days or even from 1998 (when we were spending £1m+ on players)? I'd say it hasn't dramatically improved if at all & look what happened to that squad around 1998!!

We have to move with the times, this current blueprint has seen us constantly yo-yo between League One & Championship football, let's move this club with such ambition (as we constantly get reminded) forward & start competing properly at the level we are at!!

Last one.

The club could carry more debt under FFP, but if you are looking at big signings how and what with! Mr Lansdown has turned losses into equity to cover these losses and cover operating costs, that cannot continue as he has built up a shareholding of 96%+(?).

Loans?

The club has a debt of twenty million pounds. If you propose to lose money, and add to that debt it is fair to explain how you think BCFC can service those losses.

One season where the club may break even financially, does not make up for nearly two decades of loss, and make BCFC cash rich.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Cowshed said:

Last one.

The club could carry more debt under FFP, but if you are looking at big signings how and what with! Mr Lansdown has turned losses into equity to cover these losses and cover operating costs, that cannot continue as he has built up a shareholding of 96%+(?).

Loans?

The club has a debt of twenty million pounds. If you propose to lose money, and add to that debt it is fair to explain how you think BCFC can service those losses.

One season where the club may break even financially, does not make up for nearly two decades of loss, and make BCFC cash rich.

 

But how long do you (or the club) expect to continue bringing 20,000 (in a 27,000 capacity stadium) fans through the turnstiles to watch a struggling team at the level we are supposed to be competing at?

Because if we continue to struggle & to compete, with League One players, we'll soon be back to 11,000-13,000 gates at a 27,000 capacity stadium!!

We should have so much more coming into the club, from the supporters, sponsorship, tv, corporate facilities, the rugby club using our facilities plus transfer income but we are effectively acting like a League One club & if that continues, that is exactly where we'll be!!

This thread is asking 'How Big a club are we?', in Championship terms (the standard we are supposed to be competing at) we're small because we have small minded ambitions with small minded foresight!!

The amount of debt we will build by constantly signing players to improve our bench rather than our first team is going to end up more in the long run as we start to lose supporters, sponsorship & tv money than it would be if we actually showed some ambition & signed players to improve what's on the pitch week in & week out.

Maybe we should just stop pretending that we have ambition of making it to The Premier League & even Europe because it's never going to happen & it's deluded to believe it will with the current philosophy in place!

If we are still performing financially on a par with how we were in 1998 or even 2008 then someone within the club needs sacking because if they have been unable to bring more in financially, they clearly haven't been doing their job properly & considering SL is a financial guru, it would be even more embarrassing for the club!!

So in answer to thread title, we are a small club & always will be until we a get lucky & by that I mean the sort of luck that will see me win £100m+ on the Euro Lottery!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with those that say we're a small club. When you're not accomplished much in the last two decades outside of "we nearly got a surprise promotion to the Premier League", you don't big yourself up as a sleeping giant or a promising club.

Where I think we struggle is that the club hasn't grown all that much in the last decade, and that needs to come down to Lansdown. Sure, we're spending more money, and our stadium now looks like a Championship stadium, but we've not achieved on-pitch success and we're not making enough money to push up the table. We've made good strides, but so has everyone else, and when your business model relies on financial prudence and making money from transfers, you're not going to get promoted above the other clubs that are doing the exact same thing.

That's not to say that it's a bad way to run a club. From a business perspective it's great. Cut costs, increase income, and make the business sustainable. The problem is that football isn't won by good business plans. It's won by players and managers. Football is like silicon valley. Many startups achieve success through the brilliance of a small team, some do it through ridiculous investment or buyouts, and others are just plain lucky and find success without any business plan, skilled team, or even logic. Also like football, most fail, and only a handful succeed. If you're like us, and you build your business model around being "the next Bournemouth" or "the next Huddersfield" then are you any better than the ******* idiot sales manager that thinks he's going to strike it rich with his "the next instagram, for cats" business?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tipps69 said:

But how long do you (or the club) expect to continue bringing 20,000 (in a 27,000 capacity stadium) fans through the turnstiles to watch a struggling team at the level we are supposed to be competing at?

Because if we continue to struggle & to compete, with League One players, we'll soon be back to 11,000-13,000 gates at a 27,000 capacity stadium!!

We should have so much more coming into the club, from the supporters, sponsorship, tv, corporate facilities, the rugby club using our facilities plus transfer income but we are effectively acting like a League One club & if that continues, that is exactly where we'll be!!

This thread is asking 'How Big a club are we?', in Championship terms (the standard we are supposed to be competing at) we're small because we have small minded ambitions with small minded foresight!!

The amount of debt we will build by constantly signing players to improve our bench rather than our first team is going to end up more in the long run as we start to lose supporters, sponsorship & tv money than it would be if we actually showed some ambition & signed players to improve what's on the pitch week in & week out.

Maybe we should just stop pretending that we have ambition of making it to The Premier League & even Europe because it's never going to happen & it's deluded to believe it will with the current philosophy in place!

If we are still performing financially on a par with how we were in 1998 or even 2008 then someone within the club needs sacking because if they have been unable to bring more in financially, they clearly haven't been doing their job properly & considering SL is a financial guru, it would be even more embarrassing for the club!!

So in answer to thread title, we are a small club & always will be until we a get lucky & by that I mean the sort of luck that will see me win £100m+ on the Euro Lottery!!

I really did want to reply, but will.

Bristol City is big enough already, if big is defined by how much money a club spends. Clubs have spent far less and done more, no opinion, a fact.

Mr Lansdowns investment and losses being covered are in the region of a hundred million pounds. I will take a different view that he has displayed his intention of reaching the Premier league very very clearly.

I feel Mr Lansdown will continue to run BCFC not as a sustainable business, but as his continued loss making venture operating within the confines of FFP ... And despite sums that will exceed a hundred million pounds in the future people will still question his ambition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Cowshed said:

I really did want to reply, but will.

Bristol City is big enough already, if big is defined by how much money a club spends. Clubs have spent far less and done more, no opinion, a fact.

Mr Lansdowns investment and losses being covered are in the region of a hundred million pounds. I will take a different view that he has displayed his intention of reaching the Premier league very very clearly.

I feel Mr Lansdown will continue to run BCFC not as a sustainable business, but as his continued lost making venture operating within the confines of FFP ... And despite sums that will exceed a hundred million pounds in the future people will still question his ambition.

SL`s poor management selections have cost him, this is not BCFC`S OR THE FANS FAULT and isn't every chairmans intention is to reach the prem league (haven't a clue why they want to join that world league and spend even more money) it wont be long before 100mil will buy one player.

Terrible, terrible league the prem is, full of massively over paid players and managers from all over the world mainly, do we really want all that will bring?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Cowshed said:

I really did want to reply, but will.

Bristol City is big enough already, if big is defined by how much money a club spends. Clubs have spent far less and done more, no opinion, a fact.

Mr Lansdowns investment and losses being covered are in the region of a hundred million pounds. I will take a different view that he has displayed his intention of reaching the Premier league very very clearly.

I feel Mr Lansdown will continue to run BCFC not as a sustainable business, but as his continued lost making venture operating within the confines of FFP ... And despite sums that will exceed a hundred million pounds in the future people will still question his ambition.

I've never questioned his dedication to the cause or the fact as to how important he has been to the club but for a man who is constantly making a considerable profit in his daily life, for a club with the potential that Bristol City has, we are seemingly still paying out similar sums to what we did in 1998, the club hasn't progressed since that time & continues to yo-yo between the 2nd & 3rd tiers of English football.

We continue to try & get lucky in our pursuit of success but bar 2008, luck has got us nowhere, so after nearly 40 years of hoping for some luck to progress us, I'd suggest that we need a different option!!

As I've already stated, last year alone, despite spending roughly £10m on incoming transfers on 19 players (so just over half a million on average per player), we spend that on 3 or 4 players that will considerably increase the quality within our team!

How many of those 19 incoming players actually cost less than half a million? Tomlin cost about £2.9m, so that means 18 players for about £7m!! How many of those were first team regulars?

This past season we should of seen an increased revenue through the turnstiles & matchday experience, tv money, corporate facilities, use of facilities on non-match days (Rugby) & transfer dealings, so having been willing to spend £10m on 19 players this past season & still making a considerable profit on transfers, we should be in a position to spend a fair bit more but instead of spending it on players that haven't improved on what we already have, spend it on players that are pretty much guaranteed to improve on what we currently have in the first team, stop wasting what apparent little money we have (as you seem to be indicating) on players who will never (or unlikely) be able to improve our first eleven!

We don't have the luxury of wasting millions on players to sit on the bench or who will never play first team football so spend what money we do have on improving what matters, the first team because if the first team fails & we yo-yo back to League One, we will lose a considerable amount of our income through supporters through the turnstiles, sponsorship, tv money & prize money!! We can't afford to be in League One!!

We need to stop relying on luck & start to relying on better players bringing better results & that will then attract more supporters through the turnstiles & more sponsorship, success breeds success, failure & relegation means you can expect less of everything, less spending on players, less quality of players, less supporters through the turnstiles, less sponsorship, less tv money & less prize money!! We can't afford that!!

We should have more money available to us than we've ever had before, we should stop shopping in the pound shop & start shopping in M&S, we have the facilities, now get the product right to attract the paying customers!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Tipps69 said:

I've never questioned his dedication to the cause or the fact as to how important he has been to the club but for a man who is constantly making a considerable profit in his daily life, for a club with the potential that Bristol City has, we are seemingly still paying out similar sums to what we did in 1998, the club hasn't progressed since that time & continues to yo-yo between the 2nd & 3rd tiers of English football.

We continue to try & get lucky in our pursuit of success but bar 2008, luck has got us nowhere, so after nearly 40 years of hoping for some luck to progress us, I'd suggest that we need a different option!!

As I've already stated, last year alone, despite spending roughly £10m on incoming transfers on 19 players (so just over half a million on average per player), we spend that on 3 or 4 players that will considerably increase the quality within our team!

How many of those 19 incoming players actually cost less than half a million? Tomlin cost about £2.9m, so that means 18 players for about £7m!! How many of those were first team regulars?

This past season we should of seen an increased revenue through the turnstiles & matchday experience, tv money, corporate facilities, use of facilities on non-match days (Rugby) & transfer dealings, so having been willing to spend £10m on 19 players this past season & still making a considerable profit on transfers, we should be in a position to spend a fair bit more but instead of spending it on players that haven't improved on what we already have, spend it on players that are pretty much guaranteed to improve on what we currently have in the first team, stop wasting what apparent little money we have (as you seem to be indicating) on players who will never (or unlikely) be able to improve our first eleven!

We don't have the luxury of wasting millions on players to sit on the bench or who will never play first team football so spend what money we do have on improving what matters, the first team because if the first team fails & we yo-yo back to League One, we will lose a considerable amount of our income through supporters through the turnstiles, sponsorship, tv money & prize money!! We can't afford to be in League One!!

We need to stop relying on luck & start to relying on better players bringing better results & that will then attract more supporters through the turnstiles & more sponsorship, success breeds success, failure & relegation means you can expect less of everything, less spending on players, less quality of players, less supporters through the turnstiles, less sponsorship, less tv money & less prize money!! We can't afford that!!

We should have more money available to us than we've ever had before, we should stop shopping in the pound shop & start shopping in M&S, we have the facilities, now get the product right to attract the paying customers!

excellent post;

 Is it not our policy however, to buy/bring in young/unproven in this league players....to bring them on and develop them? (no mention of cashing in on them though)

I believe the exact opposite is required i.e spend bigger on PROVEN players who would go straight into the first team and actually move us forward, no good bringing in players to loan them out or not play them. Ship out those not needed and bring in players who are going to play for us and who have proven ability in this league.

Aint gonna happen though, same old same old this season and that's if we can replace Tammy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Tipps69 said:

I've never questioned his dedication to the cause or the fact as to how important he has been to the club but for a man who is constantly making a considerable profit in his daily life, for a club with the potential that Bristol City has, we are seemingly still paying out similar sums to what we did in 1998, the club hasn't progressed since that time & continues to yo-yo between the 2nd & 3rd tiers of English football.

We continue to try & get lucky in our pursuit of success but bar 2008, luck has got us nowhere, so after nearly 40 years of hoping for some luck to progress us, I'd suggest that we need a different option!!

As I've already stated, last year alone, despite spending roughly £10m on incoming transfers on 19 players (so just over half a million on average per player), we spend that on 3 or 4 players that will considerably increase the quality within our team!

How many of those 19 incoming players actually cost less than half a million? Tomlin cost about £2.9m, so that means 18 players for about £7m!! How many of those were first team regulars?

This past season we should of seen an increased revenue through the turnstiles & matchday experience, tv money, corporate facilities, use of facilities on non-match days (Rugby) & transfer dealings, so having been willing to spend £10m on 19 players this past season & still making a considerable profit on transfers, we should be in a position to spend a fair bit more but instead of spending it on players that haven't improved on what we already have, spend it on players that are pretty much guaranteed to improve on what we currently have in the first team, stop wasting what apparent little money we have (as you seem to be indicating) on players who will never (or unlikely) be able to improve our first eleven!

We don't have the luxury of wasting millions on players to sit on the bench or who will never play first team football so spend what money we do have on improving what matters, the first team because if the first team fails & we yo-yo back to League One, we will lose a considerable amount of our income through supporters through the turnstiles, sponsorship, tv money & prize money!! We can't afford to be in League One!!

We need to stop relying on luck & start to relying on better players bringing better results & that will then attract more supporters through the turnstiles & more sponsorship, success breeds success, failure & relegation means you can expect less of everything, less spending on players, less quality of players, less supporters through the turnstiles, less sponsorship, less tv money & less prize money!! We can't afford that!!

We should have more money available to us than we've ever had before, we should stop shopping in the pound shop & start shopping in M&S, we have the facilities, now get the product right to attract the paying customers!

Bristol City have significantly increased spending and losses since 1998. The club then certainly did not spend so far past its income, the past season has been an obvious exception.

I do not disagree with spending more wisely, there is never a guaranteed success with any signing, and the sums you are now quoting are more practical v forty million over two seasons, but could in the short term require Mr Lansdown to again use his cash to cover losses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We're a pretty small club really. Haven't won anything of note, haven't spent much time in the top division...we have watched many teams from much smaller cities and towns charge past us into the higher echelons of English football....all quite embarrassing when we have a loyal, billionaire owner....but he is obviously free to spend his cash how he wishes, not how we wish. He won't appoint a big name, proven manager so we are where we are...and it ain't too shabby where we are, even though in my opinion we could move on sharpish with a top, proven, successful guy as manager....

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...