Jump to content
IGNORED

Robins & Bears. Compare & Contrast


BigAl&Toby

Recommended Posts

48 minutes ago, City oz said:

Tin, totally the opposite mate. It’s others that trust him. He’s full of it. Even DH is realizing he got hood winked. I think you are reading the wrong comics 

Whoever’s right, SL ain’t going to admit he’s wrong and change his approach. That’s the frustration. It’s either a buyout or we will continue going round in circles for the foreseeable future. All I want is for our team to entertain us fairly regularly and for the board to be honest. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think part of the problem is that SL thinks he can get to the PL by buying cheap selling high and gradually progressing through that - I don’t believe he has a timeframe and as long as it works, eventually, he will be justified.

One of the many problems with that plan is that the other competitors don’t play fair and consistently progress, Brentford being a prime example.

Look at Norwich, got themselves a decent HC, got promoted, did not go crazy and as expected got relegated, but look at them now, ready to ‘go again’ whilst keeping the purse strings tight. Sure they lose some players and may lose more this month for big £, but they recruit well and keep going.

We don’t even give ourselves a chance, DH, heaven help me and the two England coaches who have both failed in lower league management - it is a mess, and until we bring in an experienced DoF and Ashton goes it will remain so.

The summers transfer activity was dreadful and I doubt there will be much if any activity this window, although I think that will be similar throughout this league with some exceptions.

Lets not use Covid as an excuse, the decisions made after LJ went were farcical and that tells you all you need to know about this clubs ambitions.

As long as 22k people turn up every home game - when that is possible - nothing will change.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Lanterne Rouge said:

I`m convinced it was a kneejerk reaction to the accusations of not `going for it` in previous January windows. It`s the only reason I can think of anyway.

Could well be something in that.

Let's do a counterfactual. Flip back to January, Brownhill sold at a time of maximum value- as part of our model. £9m profit minus the 20-25% sell on to Preston that was mooted.

We then sign...nobody.

Just..nobody.

Wells, Henriksen, Benkovic. Could you imagine the reaction on here??

Goals and cohesion lost from midfield, versatility and energy too- that was Brownhill when on form and...nobody.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, ScottishRed said:

I think part of the problem is that SL thinks he can get to the PL by buying cheap selling high and gradually progressing through that - I don’t believe he has a timeframe and as long as it works, eventually, he will be justified.

One of the many problems with that plan is that the other competitors don’t play fair and consistently progress, Brentford being a prime example.

Look at Norwich, got themselves a decent HC, got promoted, did not go crazy and as expected got relegated, but look at them now, ready to ‘go again’ whilst keeping the purse strings tight. Sure they lose some players and may lose more this month for big £, but they recruit well and keep going.

We don’t even give ourselves a chance, DH, heaven help me and the two England coaches who have both failed in lower league management - it is a mess, and until we bring in an experienced DoF and Ashton goes it will remain so.

The summers transfer activity was dreadful and I doubt there will be much if any activity this window, although I think that will be similar throughout this league with some exceptions.

Lets not use Covid as an excuse, the decisions made after LJ went were farcical and that tells you all you need to know about this clubs ambitions.

As long as 22k people turn up every home game - when that is possible - nothing will change.

 

Nail on head....

Season ticket sales will be down next season when we are allowed back in, atmosphere will be toxic for sure, but doubt SL will take any notice. 
A relegation fight might make him sit up and realise that Ashton is slowly killing this club. But I cant see much changing in the near future. Despairing situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, ScottishRed said:

I think part of the problem is that SL thinks he can get to the PL by buying cheap selling high and gradually progressing through that - I don’t believe he has a timeframe and as long as it works, eventually, he will be justified.

One of the many problems with that plan is that the other competitors don’t play fair and consistently progress, Brentford being a prime example.

Look at Norwich, got themselves a decent HC, got promoted, did not go crazy and as expected got relegated, but look at them now, ready to ‘go again’ whilst keeping the purse strings tight. Sure they lose some players and may lose more this month for big £, but they recruit well and keep going.

We don’t even give ourselves a chance, DH, heaven help me and the two England coaches who have both failed in lower league management - it is a mess, and until we bring in an experienced DoF and Ashton goes it will remain so.

The summers transfer activity was dreadful and I doubt there will be much if any activity this window, although I think that will be similar throughout this league with some exceptions.

Lets not use Covid as an excuse, the decisions made after LJ went were farcical and that tells you all you need to know about this clubs ambitions.

As long as 22k people turn up every home game - when that is possible - nothing will change.

 

You can progress through trading upwards but I think we're lacking some key ingredients.

Could you expand on your Brentford point, when you talk of competitors not playing fair.

1) Hit rate of new signings. I believe it's middling, you need it to be excellent or outstanding!

2) Development of players, be they home grown or signed. It's okay with us, but it's by no means constantly good. How many have gone backwards since signing here?

If we'd signed some of the young players or foreign players seen at Brentford, would we have maximised their output and then market value here? I doubt it, you might have a different view. On the flipside, if Brentford had signed some of ours would they have developed better? Quite plausible.

3) FA coaches. Could that also be about contacts and utilisation of that?

See Swansea and Cooper- Woodman and Guehi have returned on loan, also Gibbs-White. Then last season, you also as well as first two returnees had Gallagher and Brewster!

4) £40m in Parachute Payments absolutely helps but Norwich are one of those good models. Bit like Burnley in the mid 2010s.

You also overlook the obvious which is that having 3 players who have been injured all season and then a lot more who haven't featured as much as hoped. We're up there for one of the worst injuries in the League this year.

Was it dreadful? Martin has been a useful free albeit overplayed. Mawson if fit is quality, Williams if fit is a strong addition, Sessegnon has his attributes, but again if fit...none of them are any use if injured and little use if overplayed and run into the ground! Brunt? Yeah he's past his best for sure. 

I might also add, you criticise the spending and the summer plans but how do you (or I) know that we aren't hamstrung this season on two levels! 

1) For all we know we might have spent big last season and been hemmed in.

2) That would be reflected in results, financial projections and future financial information that is submitted to the EFL and could hem us in.

3) See points 1 and 2. We might have been banking on a good profit in 2018/19 as the foundation for a two year window. However the rejig of FFP due to Covid meant the following:

A) Pre Covid the £25M LOSS drops off this summer, £10m profit the starting point.

B) Due to Covid, this season and last season is combined and averaged into one, with 2018/19 the next back and therefore £25m loss remains on the books.

With a combination of the above I suspect we might be walking the line a little this season. Come summer 2021, that £25m LOSS will finally be gone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Imagine this....

SL moves in high-end business circles.

Finance companies, stockbroking companies rent the top 3 floors of the new office blocks with wonderful views.

A potentially big client, a QPR or Rugby fan amongst the group come to Bristol on Friday, talk some business, retire to a swanky top Bristol restaurant for dinner, and stay (free of charge of course) at the luxury rooms in the top floor of the new Hotel, enjoying the Suspension Bridge and city vista.

Raoul, their personal butler assures them anything they need, just let him know. Anything at all sir.

Picked up in a limo before lunch after a sumptuous breakfast and spa, and taken to AG where, surprise surprise, they enjoy the luxury box watching City v QPR or Bears V Wasps (what a co-incidence!).

Chat some more about business, and how the wonderful 5000 capacity indoor function arena, currently used by The Flyers would be the perfect venue for a convention for their company.

Do a great deal on a 3 year agreement.

Of course everyone attending those conventions will be supplied by in-house food and drink and stay in the nice hotels and apartments that surround AG.....

 

All owned by SL

 

Repeat 40 times a year.

That's how the money gets made, that's what's on offer to the new owners.

Business with a side-helping of sport.

Oh, and a shit-load of houses to sell on AV.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What about the Commercial Revenue included within that which flows to Bristol City Holdings- or is that separate to this?

Would that all flow to SL in your scenario then- does it already in fact?

Because a lot of the difference between Bristol City FC Limited and Bristol City Holdings is the commercial revenue- or a large chunk of it anyway- included within Ashton Gate Limited accounts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

What about the Commercial Revenue included within that which flows to Bristol City Holdings- or is that separate to this?

Would that all flow to SL in your scenario then- does it already in fact?

Because a lot of the difference between Bristol City FC Limited and Bristol City Holdings is the commercial revenue- or a large chunk of it anyway- included within Ashton Gate Limited accounts.

Seeing as he owns the lot - it will all go the SL.

I'd imagine the 998th richest man on the planet can set up his taxation to pay as little as possible.

Where does he live again?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, The Constant Rabbit said:

Seeing as he owns the lot - it will all go the SL.

I'd imagine the 998th richest man on the planet can set up his taxation to pay as little as possible.

Where does he live again?

 

Assuming you mean this future Commercial Revenue in that scenario?

Because as I say, looking at the accounts for Bristol City Holdings, AGL and the football club, seems that there's a £12-13m difference between the Holding Company and club- and a decent chunk that commercial revenue. In the first it was £30m or so, in the 2nd it was £17-18m IIRC.

Don't think he's in any kind of profitable position now, but in the future? Who knows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Assuming you mean this future Commercial Revenue in that scenario?

Because as I say, looking at the accounts for Bristol City Holdings, AGL and the football club, seems that there's a £12-13m difference between the Holding Company and club- and a decent chunk that commercial revenue. In the first it was £30m or so, in the 2nd it was £17-18m IIRC.

Don't think he's in any kind of profitable position now, but in the future? Who knows.

image.thumb.jpeg.06aedeeb5c851091bb8d57a3f6d5025f.jpeg
SL owns Pula!

It all belongs to SL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

image.thumb.jpeg.06aedeeb5c851091bb8d57a3f6d5025f.jpeg
SL owns Pula!

It all belongs to SL.

He could certainly claim the future development revenue from himself, hell he could claim a greater slice of the current commercial revenue.

Looking at the future streams though, nothing to stop him doing that whether in part or full, just question whether he will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Could well be something in that.

Let's do a counterfactual. Flip back to January, Brownhill sold at a time of maximum value- as part of our model. £9m profit minus the 20-25% sell on to Preston that was mooted.

We then sign...nobody.

Just..nobody.

Wells, Henriksen, Benkovic. Could you imagine the reaction on here??

Goals and cohesion lost from midfield, versatility and energy too- that was Brownhill when on form and...nobody.

The signing of Wells (who is not bad at our level) was another example of the confused nonsense at the club. Would Brentford have signed him (or Brunt)? Posh ? Southampton ? Never in a million years. You would sign him on a free transfer at that age. It means we will have to generate an upside on another player to pay for that transfer. It was a terrible decision and shows we do not have a genuine any policy or strategy at the club. It is a big charade, and will fall apart as we have run out of big assets to sell, and the environment has changed. If Fam leaves in the summer for nothing, we will have some big issues with finance. But you know that, you post some great info. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Midred said:

Yet a lot on otib were raving about Wells. The next transfer window shopping list threads will be interesting!

As a player, he is (was) ok. It is more about investing so much on a player that will not have an upside. That he is not used well, plays out of position and the club does not seem to know how to maximise his ability is another issue. Plus he clearly has regretted the move. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

He could certainly claim the future development revenue from himself, hell he could claim a greater slice of the current commercial revenue.

Looking at the future streams though, nothing to stop him doing that whether in part or full, just question whether he will.

Thanks for the graphic  @Davefevs ?

Believe it on not but when the question crossed my mind I wasn’t wanting it to become necessarily about Steve or FFP or ownership, although I guess all of those are arguably linked.

My comparisons between the Bears and us was more about what differences exist when ultimate ownership is common, why that might be the case and whether - if the appetite and opportunity exists - whether we can learn from whatever it is that seems to mean greater success for the Bears.

Now I get we might have different backgrounds and come from different places. I get that financial rules and restrictions might be different and that they can influence some decisions.

But it can’t just be that. Can it? 

We’ve seen one player leave so far who contributed the square root of **** all. We’ve allowed others to leave who were either winners or more entertaining. We persist with some who are best inconsistent, at worse simply the type that aren’t good enough. We sign player after player who are then injured and don’t play for ages - or ever.

Is that simply bad luck? Or incompetence? Does it happen to the Bears? Or just us?

And I guess the ultimate question for the ultimate beneficial owner, why accept it? Particularly where I very much doubt such woeful bad luck/incompetence elsewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Psychopomp said:

The signing of Wells (who is not bad at our level) was another example of the confused nonsense at the club.

It did have a whiff of panic about it - was it a desperate last throw of the dice to save LJ, who SL had mentored since he left the club years prior? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, CyderInACan said:

It did have a whiff of panic about it - was it a desperate last throw of the dice to save LJ, who SL had mentored since he left the club years prior? 

Might have been.  For me it was a case of we are dealing with Burnley over Brownhill, can we use that to our advantage....who have they got?  Wells? Vydra?

We got Wells.

Was there much more critical thinking than that?

Dunno.

Overall he’s been disappointing.  No doubt about that.  But could be still turn out good?  Yep, imho.  Will he? We will have to wait and see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 03/01/2021 at 08:43, RedRock said:

Ps think those that believe Lansdown is using City as a ‘cover’ for and purchases and planning permissions have gone one conspiracy too far. 

 

On 03/01/2021 at 09:19, Alessandro said:

This was the point I was making earlier - there are better, easier ways to make money!!

Yes SL may well start turning a profit at some point, but in the championship it’s peanuts and the figures banded about for property etc barely add up to cover his investment already in the club.

I think the criticism of SL is all good and fair, but it’s the ‘conspiracy theories’ and verging on conspiracy theories about his intentions, especially financially, which IMO I don’t subscribe to and don’t think help our relations with him. To be honest, if it was me, I’d find that alienating!

Remember this man is a billionaire, getting richer all the time living in a tax haven. He knows all about how to make and keep money - any profit from Bristol Sport (unless City get into the prem and then Europe) is surely change for a shoe buffer.

There are no conspiracy theories.

I, and others, are not suggesting that SL is using Bristol Sport as "cover" for purchases and planning permissions. These purchases and planning permissions are all out there in the public eye, the real estate purchases have happened and preparation for the planning permissions are well underway, and will be submitted this year. It is a fact that the proposed developments are interlinked with SL's ownership of Ashton Gate, Ashton Vale, Bristol Sport, Bristol City, Bristol Bears and Bristol Flyers. Indisputable. He doesn't have to use any "cover" because the deal for housing at Ashton Vale is to be done off the back of the stadium plans and the sporting quarter is, you guessed it, to be used partly for sport, but will also include two hotels and 250ish residential units. 

The pay-offs from those deals is very obvious, and what with the value he has already added to Ashton Gate (through both matchday and non-matchday revenue) he will have hugely valuable assets coming to fruition within the next couple of years. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, BigAl&Toby said:

Thanks for the graphic  @Davefevs ?

Believe it on not but when the question crossed my mind I wasn’t wanting it to become necessarily about Steve or FFP or ownership, although I guess all of those are arguably linked.

My comparisons between the Bears and us was more about what differences exist when ultimate ownership is common, why that might be the case and whether - if the appetite and opportunity exists - whether we can learn from whatever it is that seems to mean greater success for the Bears.

Now I get we might have different backgrounds and come from different places. I get that financial rules and restrictions might be different and that they can influence some decisions.

But it can’t just be that. Can it? 

We’ve seen one player leave so far who contributed the square root of **** all. We’ve allowed others to leave who were either winners or more entertaining. We persist with some who are best inconsistent, at worse simply the type that aren’t good enough. We sign player after player who are then injured and don’t play for ages - or ever.

Is that simply bad luck? Or incompetence? Does it happen to the Bears? Or just us?

And I guess the ultimate question for the ultimate beneficial owner, why accept it? Particularly where I very much doubt such woeful bad luck/incompetence elsewhere.

To take it into a sporting level, Bristol sacked Andy Robinson 8- surely not much more than 10 games anyway- into the season, even after promotion. Ex England head coach no less.

Pat Lam came later and has done fantastic work. I don't follow rugby greatly and they had to go down first but the results speak for themselves.

I bet the rugby doesn't have as many players with rolling injuries, year in and year out!

I don't think he favours one over the other but I wonder if he would be so sanguine about constant rolling injuries in Rugby? Or if he'd launch a strategic review, an audit of the fitness and conditioning, management of it.

Because really he should do it with the football!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

To take it into a sporting level, Bristol sacked Andy Robinson 8- surely not much more than 10 games anyway- into the season, even after promotion. Ex England head coach no less.

Pat Lam came later and has done fantastic work. I don't follow rugby greatly and they had to go down first but the results speak for themselves.

I bet the rugby doesn't have as many players with rolling injuries, year in and year out!

Last paragraph. You might well be right.

But given rugby is a contact sport and football isn’t why would that be?

Is it down to recruiting players who are injury prone? Or is it down to better rehabilitation?

I’ve no idea. About much really. Just like asking questions..... ?

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...