The Original OTIB Posted August 10, 2018 Report Share Posted August 10, 2018 The debate about what investment means in footballing terms rages on, with many wanting high value players on high wages (folly in my book without the finances/base to support it). More broadly, what is the true net value of the Lansdown investment? On balance, it's been positive in many areas, and it is churlish and ungrateful to say otherwise. However, has it really hurt the Lansdown family pocket? In 2010 there was a move to Guernsey. Getting on for 10 years, how much do you think that he's saved in income tax? 20% on Guernsey, 45% top rate here. Then there's the 7% dividend tax introduced last year in the UK; another saving. Overall, I would calculate that the Lansdown's are way ahead of their net spend on Bristol City, Bristol Sport and Ground Improvements (the latter an asset serving the wider business finances and not the football club which has no financial stake). My question then: Is the Lansdown loss a myth? I think, on balance, yet it is. What does this mean? Well, to me he should make the best supporter gesture possible. Gift 51% of the ground back to the Football Club with an option to buy the rest. I applaud what's been done but the heart and soul of a club is it's ground and it's supporters. Let them be truly reunited. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bristol Rob Posted August 10, 2018 Report Share Posted August 10, 2018 3 minutes ago, The Original OTIB said: The debate about what investment means in footballing terms rages on, with many wanting high value players on high wages (folly in my book without the finances/base to support it). More broadly, what is the true net value of the Lansdown investment? On balance, it's been positive in many areas, and it is churlish and ungrateful to say otherwise. However, has it really hurt the Lansdown family pocket? In 2010 there was a move to Guernsey. Getting on for 10 years, how much do you think that he's saved in income tax? 20% on Guernsey, 45% top rate here. Then there's the 7% dividend tax introduced last year in the UK; another saving. Overall, I would calculate that the Lansdown's are way ahead of their net spend on Bristol City, Bristol Sport and Ground Improvements (the latter an asset serving the wider business finances and not the football club which has no financial stake). My question then: Is the Lansdown loss a myth? I think, on balance, yet it is. What does this mean? Well, to me he should make the best supporter gesture possible. Gift 51% of the ground back to the Football Club with an option to buy the rest. I applaud what's been done but the heart and soul of a club is it's ground and it's supporters. Let them be truly reunited. Why would the football club want some or all of the stadium back? If the 'club' owned it, surely it would then be on the hook for all running costs, whereas it can pay a peppercorn rent to the stadium company but be the beneficiary of the revenue generated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted August 10, 2018 Report Share Posted August 10, 2018 1 minute ago, The Original OTIB said: The debate about what investment means in footballing terms rages on, with many wanting high value players on high wages (folly in my book without the finances/base to support it). More broadly, what is the true net value of the Lansdown investment? On balance, it's been positive in many areas, and it is churlish and ungrateful to say otherwise. However, has it really hurt the Lansdown family pocket? In 2010 there was a move to Guernsey. Getting on for 10 years, how much do you think that he's saved in income tax? 20% on Guernsey, 45% top rate here. Then there's the 7% dividend tax introduced last year in the UK; another saving. Overall, I would calculate that the Lansdown's are way ahead of their net spend on Bristol City, Bristol Sport and Ground Improvements (the latter an asset serving the wider business finances and not the football club which has no financial stake). My question then: Is the Lansdown loss a myth? I think, on balance, yet it is. What does this mean? Well, to me he should make the best supporter gesture possible. Gift 51% of the ground back to the Football Club with an option to buy the rest. I applaud what's been done but the heart and soul of a club is it's ground and it's supporters. Let them be truly reunited. absolute horseshit he's spent 100m of his money (not the clubs) on the stadium, he's covered the loss each season since he's owned us which started and around 3 million ballooned to 18.9 million and now back down to 4 million (latest accounts) lets put a rough estimate on it shall we (he's been the top man about 15 years) say 4 million a season until we got to the championship (3 years to be generous) so thats 12 million and then for the rest of the time lets say 12 million a season for arguments sake 9x12 thats 108 million, So we're up to 200 million before we've even made a profit thats with out the investment in the training ground and on going improvements, and you want more? its lansdowns personal money he could do an olyson and not spend anything as well as bleed the club dry, he doesn't he covers the clubs loses every season Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted August 10, 2018 Report Share Posted August 10, 2018 We could have the current Swansea owners- not Huw Jenkins pre their new investors, but the American investors as of now. To me, what's going on there given they've got parachute payments...some of it is balancing the books absolutely. Some of it though looks like asset stripping to me- especially given they had a hefty wage reduction as part of their contracts for relegation. We're lucky indeed to have SL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Original OTIB Posted August 10, 2018 Author Report Share Posted August 10, 2018 1 minute ago, Monkeh said: absolute horseshit he's spent 100m of his money (not the clubs) on the stadium, he's covered the loss each season since he's owned us which started and around 3 million ballooned to 18.9 million and now back down to 4 million (latest accounts) lets put a rough estimate on it shall we (he's been the top man about 15 years) say 4 million a season until we got to the championship (3 years to be generous) so thats 12 million and then for the rest of the time lets say 12 million a season for arguments sake 9x12 thats 108 million, So we're up to 200 million before we've even made a profit thats with out the investment in the training ground and on going improvements, and you want more? its lansdowns personal money he could do an olyson and not spend anything as well as bleed the club dry, he doesn't he covers the clubs loses every season Meaning that for 10 years in a tax haven at 20% rather than 45% here (and 50% in prior years) he's saved nothing in tax on an immense fortune/income? Perhaps you can address that point? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted August 10, 2018 Report Share Posted August 10, 2018 1 minute ago, The Original OTIB said: Meaning that for 10 years in a tax haven at 20% rather than 45% here (and 50% in prior years) he's saved nothing in tax on an immense fortune/income? Perhaps you can address that point? but thats not the clubs money, why should he give the club anything? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Original OTIB Posted August 10, 2018 Author Report Share Posted August 10, 2018 7 minutes ago, Bristol Rob said: Why would the football club want some or all of the stadium back? If the 'club' owned it, surely it would then be on the hook for all running costs, whereas it can pay a peppercorn rent to the stadium company but be the beneficiary of the revenue generated. It is an asset that is making money way beyond football. It is a tangible asset with true value. That is on top of the emotional side of club/supporter/ground. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bar BS3 Posted August 10, 2018 Report Share Posted August 10, 2018 3 minutes ago, The Original OTIB said: Meaning that for 10 years in a tax haven at 20% rather than 45% here (and 50% in prior years) he's saved nothing in tax on an immense fortune/income? Perhaps you can address that point? What has that got to do with anything..?! Any saving he’s made with totally legal tax planning, would still be in his bank account, had he not spent in on our club. This is a very bizarre and pointless thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lorenzos Only Goal Posted August 10, 2018 Report Share Posted August 10, 2018 8 minutes ago, Bristol Rob said: Why would the football club want some or all of the stadium back? If the 'club' owned it, surely it would then be on the hook for all running costs, whereas it can pay a peppercorn rent to the stadium company but be the beneficiary of the revenue generated. I think people miss this regularly and they probably will still miss it even now you have pointed it out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted August 10, 2018 Report Share Posted August 10, 2018 1 minute ago, The Original OTIB said: It is an asset that is making money way beyond football. It is a tangible asset with true value. That is on top of the emotional side of club/supporter/ground. but its not the clubs asset, its nothing to do with the club it doesn't even come into it, do you know when the last time the football club made a profit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Original OTIB Posted August 10, 2018 Author Report Share Posted August 10, 2018 3 minutes ago, Monkeh said: but thats not the clubs money, why should he give the club anything? The thread topic is clear in that is talking about his overall loss and whether it is true or not. The investment has been fantastic, and we give thanks, but overall, it has not hurt him given the massive amount that he has saved in tax by living in Guernsey. The two are inextricably related. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted August 10, 2018 Report Share Posted August 10, 2018 1 minute ago, The Original OTIB said: The thread topic is clear in that is talking about his overall loss and whether it is true or not. The investment has been fantastic, and we give thanks, but overall, it has not hurt him given the massive amount that he has saved in tax by living in Guernsey. The two are inextricably related. No they aren't related at all and if you think they are then frankly you're an idiot he's spent 200 million he's claimed nothing back from the club, if he lived bristol and paid the tax do you think that would go to the club? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Original OTIB Posted August 10, 2018 Author Report Share Posted August 10, 2018 2 minutes ago, Monkeh said: but its not the clubs asset, its nothing to do with the club it doesn't even come into it, do you know when the last time the football club made a profit? Please read things more carefully. It would be 51% the clubs asset under the scenario that I have laid forth. It is a profitable asset beyond football and it is growing. That is aside from the emotional investment in it as Ashton Gate, part of our history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted August 10, 2018 Report Share Posted August 10, 2018 2 minutes ago, The Original OTIB said: Please read things more carefully. It would be 51% the clubs asset under the scenario that I have laid forth. It is a profitable asset beyond football and it is growing. That is aside from the emotional investment in it as Ashton Gate, part of our history. i have read it, you seem to think lansdown should give up 51% of the club because he lives in guensey, you don't live in the real world Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Original OTIB Posted August 10, 2018 Author Report Share Posted August 10, 2018 Just now, Monkeh said: No they aren't related at all and if you think they are then frankly you're an idiot he's spent 200 million he's claimed nothing back from the club, if he lived bristol and paid the tax do you think that would go to the club? Thank you for your unmistakable ire and bellicose belligerence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Original OTIB Posted August 10, 2018 Author Report Share Posted August 10, 2018 2 minutes ago, Monkeh said: i have read it, you seem to think lansdown should give up 51% of the club because he lives in guensey, you don't live in the real world Yet you still get it wrong. 51% of the ground, not the Club. The club currently do not own the ground. I do live in the real world and have previously operated in the world of financial planning for high net worth individuals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted August 10, 2018 Report Share Posted August 10, 2018 Lansdown ultimately owns the ground, we all know that. Owns the club too- it's stating the obvious but I take it as a given. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Original OTIB Posted August 10, 2018 Author Report Share Posted August 10, 2018 10 minutes ago, Bar BS3 said: What has that got to do with anything..?! Any saving he’s made with totally legal tax planning, would still be in his bank account, had he not spent in on our club. This is a very bizarre and pointless thread. Who said it wasn't legal? The topic is about his presumed net loss. It is not bizarre and pointless to point out that overall, the massive tax savings have eased the burden, and indeed superceded it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red panda Posted August 10, 2018 Report Share Posted August 10, 2018 10 minutes ago, The Original OTIB said: The thread topic is clear in that is talking about his overall loss and whether it is true or not. The investment has been fantastic, and we give thanks, but overall, it has not hurt him given the massive amount that he has saved in tax by living in Guernsey. The two are inextricably related. Sorry, you are just like Theresa May. When you say you've been "clear", that's actually the opposite of what's happened. Most sane posters have no doubt that SL's ploughed a lot of his own money into the club, in a sensible way, and are very grateful for that. What happens to the rest of his assets doesn't concern us. Sorry if I haven't been paying attention but I don't recognise the "myth" about "The Lansdown Loss" or where this has come from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted August 10, 2018 Report Share Posted August 10, 2018 4 minutes ago, The Original OTIB said: Yet you still get it wrong. 51% of the ground, not the Club. The club currently do not own the ground. I do live in the real world and have previously operated in the world of financial planning for high net worth individuals. Ashton Gate holdings own the ground, https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/01501663 Persons with sginificant control, Doug Harman Keith Dawe and Steve lansdown 3 minutes ago, The Original OTIB said: Who said it wasn't legal? The topic is about his presumed net loss. It is not bizarre and pointless to point out that overall, the massive tax savings have eased the burden, and indeed superceded it. theres nothing presumed at all he's spent 200+ million on the club and has got 0 back Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted August 10, 2018 Report Share Posted August 10, 2018 3 minutes ago, Monkeh said: Ashton Gate holdings own the ground, https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/01501663 Persons with sginificant control, Doug Harman Keith Dawe and Steve lansdown theres nothing presumed at all he's spent 200+ million on the club and has got 0 back The person with significant control however is Steve Lansdown... https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/01501663/persons-with-significant-control Which is absolutely fine but given he owns 75% or more of shares, it follows that he would own the ground. https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/05450440/persons-with-significant-control Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Original OTIB Posted August 10, 2018 Author Report Share Posted August 10, 2018 2 minutes ago, Monkeh said: Ashton Gate holdings own the ground, https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/01501663 Persons with sginificant control, Doug Harman Keith Dawe and Steve lansdown That entity has no financial stake in Bristol City Football Club Ltd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted August 10, 2018 Report Share Posted August 10, 2018 1 minute ago, The Original OTIB said: That entity has no financial stake in Bristol City Football Club Ltd. but you want that company to hand over 51% of their assets to the football club so its entirely relevant, Do you know why Ashton Gate is owned by Ashton Gate holdings and not Bristol City Football Club Limited? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lrrr Posted August 10, 2018 Report Share Posted August 10, 2018 The whole reason the club doesn't own the stadium is so it can't be risked if the club got into financial trouble but we still get the financial benefits from it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingtonRed Posted August 10, 2018 Report Share Posted August 10, 2018 If you want to know about the Lansdown loss, just compare his net worth with that of his business partner 1.88 billion compared with 2.39 billion - 530 million down. The majority of that will have been due to selling shares to help cover the football club losses, build stadium etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cidered abroad Posted August 10, 2018 Report Share Posted August 10, 2018 There is a very sensible reason why the stadium and the land it sits on, is not owned by the football (or rugby) club. Should either of the clubs go bust, the stadium is still there, available for immediate use for the phoenix clubs that will arise from the ashes. It is the best way to protect the future for both City and Bears. Unless it ever ceases to be used as a sports stadium, it is worthless but to replace it elsewhere would probably take at least five years and how many hundreds of millions of £££££££. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted August 10, 2018 Report Share Posted August 10, 2018 4 minutes ago, hodge said: The whole reason the club doesn't own the stadium is so it can't be risked if the club got into financial trouble but we still get the financial benefits from it. bingo, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cidered abroad Posted August 10, 2018 Report Share Posted August 10, 2018 1 minute ago, Monkeh said: bingo, End of thread! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RightUpInCider Posted August 10, 2018 Report Share Posted August 10, 2018 32 minutes ago, The Original OTIB said: Meaning that for 10 years in a tax haven at 20% rather than 45% here (and 50% in prior years) he's saved nothing in tax on an immense fortune/income? Perhaps you can address that point? That’s completely irrelevant.... his decision to move to Guernsey is completed independent of his investments in Bristol City. SL has been the saviour of our football club and will rightly have a massive place in our clubs history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted August 10, 2018 Report Share Posted August 10, 2018 1 minute ago, cidered abroad said: End of thread! i was expecting a mic drop from you, I'm most disappointed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.