"He's taken us as far as he can"

[Robbored]

31 minutes ago, BigAl&Toby said:

Lansdown never wanted to relocate to Ashton Vale. Twas a smokescreen to get what he really wanted. His cake and the crumbs after he’d devoured it….

Ashton Vale was only ever wanted for it’s true development potential. 

Houses. Not a sports stadium.

Got any hard evidence of that? or is it just made up agenda supporting complete bollocks?

[Show Me The Money!]

I read that article I don’t get the feeling of wanting the Lansdown’s to sell up. So many of the clubs mentioned with foreign owners who have come in with supposed unlimited wealth and delivered nothing but massive debt on the clubs.

SL has made some bad appointments and we are crying out for a director of football to work with the COO to agree a business and football plan and then just let them get on with it. 
 

i believe SL is a City fan and looking to do the best for the club. He would of sold up ages ago otherwise. He’s a retired  billionaire ffs.

If some other billionaire comes in or some investment group with hidden backing that we’ll never know anything about take over then the risk of things going further tits up increases. Just look at the other takeovers of other clubs in this division. How many have got to the prem and established themselves without then coming back down after a couple of seasons and ended up with massive debts. Cardiff, Swansea, Reading, Hull, Sheff Utd

 

Edited November 18, 2021 by Show Me The Money!

[Kingswood Robin]

6 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said:

 

Just listed as secretary in that Companies House listing:  https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/03230871/officers

I'm not for suggesting that Steve doesn't take major decisions. He's not hands-off in that he doesn't know what the board are doing. I use that phrase in that he has, by his own admission, "stepped back" from day-to-day running of BCFC and he lives a long way away and doesn't attend board meetings. Which is why he made Jon his proxy in effect. 

Is this proxy often physically further away than the person they are representing?

If the family really is thinking more about it's next adventure and their heart isn't in the football any more, they need to move on. It's making for terrible viewing. Not unlike watching the last few months of a striker that knows full well they won't be here next season. The way things have been allowed to drift is starting to make SL look a bit like Young (old) Mr Grace ! 

 

[NcnsBcfc]

3 hours ago, TonyTonyTony said:

Its very easy to spend other people's money.....

 

The thing about it being Lansdown' money is that all the equity that SL has put into the club, has been converted into shares, that are owned by him

It's not the Mel Morris case at Derby, where the whole pack of cards has come falling down, and he's lost a fortune. If SL was to walk away/sell the club; then the £150m that he has invested (then converted into shares) would be recompensed by the buyers. He's certainly not going down the Eddie Davies at Bolton route, of writing off £125m worth of loans. 

I admire Lansdown's determination to upgrade AG, and the Failand facility. But he is no mug when it comes to finances. Any loss made by the club, will not of impacted on his own finances/wealth. You just offset the loss against other companies operating under the Pula/Bristol City stadium Holdings banner, and any loan to cover that loss; is converted into yet more shares. Those shares will get cashed out at some later stage i'm sure; one way or another.

 

Edited November 18, 2021 by NcnsBcfc

[Kid in the Riot]

52 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

My view, a cynical view is….The football club is the loss-leader for the opportunity of “everything else”….the flats / houses, land, etc.  I’m sure if you net them off, he’ll make money on the overall “thing”.

I also think that he is doing it for good reasons too, but he isn’t gifting the money.

That's absolutely right. When they walk away from Bristol City, I am convinced the Lansdowns will do so having not made a substantial personal financial loss, and with the sporting quarter and Ashton Vale elements, may in fact walk away with a handsome profit. 

The company that submitted the sporting quarter application has three named directors, by the way:

Martin Griffiths, Gavin Marshall and Jon Lansdown.

All three stand to be enriched considerably by that project. Marshall seems a decent enough guy, but seems to have come from nowhere. I'd be interested to know how and why he has got himself into a position where he stands to make a considerable amount of money from a Bristol Sport project. 

It appears that the Lansdowns are now "looking after" a few of their closest allies, as the end of their reign nears. 

Nothing illegal or even morally wrong with it, necessarily, but something that I feel people need to be aware of. 

Griffiths, Marshall, and Steve and John, will surely walk away with millions between them from this project. 

Yet to most City fans they are viewed either as club employees or benefactors. That's certainly not the full story... 

[NcnsBcfc]

3 hours ago, Major Isewater said:

Some listened to the Oxford and Watford fans who were more than delighted to see the back of him and the  toxic atmosphere he bought to their clubs.

Ashton did some good for the club but more good for Mark Ashton .

 

Yep, what was he basic wage per year? Something like 500k wasn't it?

No doubt he'll have some bonus/incentive structure in place as well. No surprise that after gaining our first profit in 20+ years (basically down to accounting the Kelly money in with the Webster one); he walked. He knew he would never be able to recreate what he had done during the last 4/5 years, as the cupboard was now bare; and the gamble on the 60 players; hadn't paid off.

It's amazing that he is trying the same thing at Ipswich now, isn't it? something like 20 players bought in the summer. With no salary caps in place, L1 is obviously the place to try it now. He must do a wonderful Powerpoint presentation to the heirachy.

 

[TonyTonyTony]

3 minutes ago, NcnsBcfc said:

I admire Lansdown's determination to upgrade AG, and the Failand facility. But he is no mug when it comes to finances. Any loss made by the club, will not of impacted on his own finances/wealth. You just offset the loss against other companies operating under the Pula/Bristol City stadium Holdings banner, and any loan to cover that loss; is converted into yet more shares. Those shares will get cashed out at some later stage i'm sure; one way or another.

You are right - i just find it a bit lazy to say he can easily afford more. Its not for us to decide that

BTW i am in the camp that the club needs a fundamental change, but im also wary about what new ownership would bring. 

[Kingswood Robin]

2 minutes ago, TonyTonyTony said:

You are right - i just find it a bit lazy to say he can easily afford more. Its not for us to decide that

BTW i am in the camp that the club needs a fundamental change, but im also wary about what new ownership would bring. 

True, but he is the owner and we should keep working on it !

People at the club will shortly be working very hard to get more money out of us. A two way thing. 

[NcnsBcfc]

8 minutes ago, TonyTonyTony said:

You are right - i just find it a bit lazy to say he can easily afford more. Its not for us to decide that

BTW i am in the camp that the club needs a fundamental change, but im also wary about what new ownership would bring. 

Completely agree Tony, it all feels very stale now. It's almost as if the Lansdown era has run it's course; and the Sports village was the last opportunity to grind out some money out of the situation.

The thing with the necessary change though, is how can it happen whilst the Sports village is going through the required planning application/building phase? Any new owner would probably have to keep the project running in order for everybody concerned to make their money out of it.

So any potential buyer of Bristol City would have to recompense SL's shares, then pay for the  building fixtures/fittings (AG,HPC); then possibly the Sports Village. Would they have to buy Bristol Sport as well? Rugby/Basketball all the other minor sports under that umbrella.

I can't image the Lansdown's going ahead with the Sport's village if the football club isn't tied into the package. The whole thing feels so unwieldy at the moment; and that we've taken our focus off what is happening on the pitch with the team. Really it should be the team's success that it the momentum for upgrading stadia/training facilities/Sports villages.

Just feels more like asset building at the moment.

Edited November 18, 2021 by NcnsBcfc

[NcnsBcfc]

3 minutes ago, And Its Smith said:

Makes the Gould interview even more bizarre 

Is this for the Lansdown "taken as far as we can " thread or another "Nige is back one"?

[BigAl&Toby]

30 minutes ago, Robbored said:

Got any hard evidence of that? or is it just made up agenda supporting complete bollocks?

Sorry. Couldn’t respond earlier. Bargain Hunt was on.

No evidence that I’m sharing with you. 

How about good old common sense? Ever asked yourself why if he’s as successful as he clearly is in other aspects of his life he’s made such a mess of this part?

Or perhaps he hasn’t. Perhaps his plan is coming together quite nicely.

And which bit aren’t you clear about? 

The structure of Pula and BCFC? The fact that Steve is the beneficial owner? The fact that he’s put his money in and secured with a debenture?

You keep living your dream. If you like what you’re seeing week in week out then carry on.

Meanwhile Steve, Maggie and Jon will appreciate your support. Keep the faith.

 

[Coxy27]

1 hour ago, Red-Robbo said:

 I think you'll find SL isn't a director of BCFC any more. Gould is listed as a director, but as an employee that hinders his ability to disagree with any decision taken by the Lansdown family. Marshall is company secretary, not a director. 

Look at most other clubs and you'll find more than two non-employee directors.

There is a bit of a discrepancy between Companies House and the OS. I think you're right about SL judging from Companies House.

Marshall however, is a Director:

Along with JL, Harman and Gould.

[Robbored]

21 minutes ago, BigAl&Toby said:

Sorry. Couldn’t respond earlier. Bargain Hunt was on.

No evidence that I’m sharing with you. 

How about good old common sense? Ever asked yourself why if he’s as successful as he clearly is in other aspects of his life he’s made such a mess of this part?

Or perhaps he hasn’t. Perhaps his plan is coming together quite nicely.

And which bit aren’t you clear about? 

The structure of Pula and BCFC? The fact that Steve is the beneficial owner? The fact that he’s put his money in and secured with a debenture?

You keep living your dream. If you like what you’re seeing week in week out then carry on.

Meanwhile Steve, Maggie and Jon will appreciate your support. Keep the faith.

 

You don’t have any evidence because there is none.

So it’s just a made up agenda supporting complete load of bollocks then……..……

Edited November 18, 2021 by Robbored

[sh1t_ref_again]

47 minutes ago, Show Me The Money! said:

I read that article I don’t get the feeling of wanting the Lansdown’s to sell up. So many of the clubs mentioned with foreign owners who have come in with supposed unlimited wealth and delivered nothing but massive debt on the clubs.

SL has made some bad appointments and we are crying out for a director of football to work with the COO to agree a business and football plan and then just let them get on with it. 
 

i believe SL is a City fan and looking to do the best for the club. He would of sold up ages ago otherwise. He’s a retired  billionaire ffs.

If some other billionaire comes in or some investment group with hidden backing that we’ll never know anything about take over then the risk of things going further tits up increases. Just look at the other takeovers of other clubs in this division. How many have got to the prem and established themselves without then coming back down after a couple of seasons and ended up with massive debts. Cardiff, Swansea, Reading, Hull, Sheff Utd

 

Felt the same, all the article did was to reinforce the likelihood of being owned by some anonymous just got rich Chinese merchant as a status symbol or a bunch of investors hoping to chuck some money and get to the premier league promise land and when that does not work looking how to exit and sell on.

It would seem that 10 million a year losses are low to average for a championship team, so with approx 25 games at home depending on cups, with lets say 17,000 home fans per game, if they all pay an extra £23.50 each per game then that will cover the losses, or how much each game you attend (if losses were only £10m) are being subsidised by the owners. Of course a few will try to say SL is going to make money out of this and cover all the money he has put in, but its easy to write what ever you want on a forum and pass off as fact without the slightest bit of evidence to back it up or true in depth knowledge.

[Port Said Red]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

My view, a cynical view is….The football club is the loss-leader for the opportunity of “everything else”….the flats / houses, land, etc.  I’m sure if you net them off, he’ll make money on the overall “thing”.

I also think that he is doing it for good reasons too, but he isn’t gifting the money.

 

1 hour ago, BigAl&Toby said:

The blind still lead the blind….

Lansdown never wanted to relocate to Ashton Vale. Twas a smokescreen to get what he really wanted. His cake and the crumbs after he’d devoured it….

Ashton Vale was only ever wanted for it’s true development potential. 

Houses. Not a sports stadium.

And bugger me he got them both. The cash cow keeps mooing as Steve’s hands are massaging it’s teats.

Meanwhile we’ve got a footballing feast to look forward to on Saturday…….

So the old joke is "how do you become a millionaire?, Start with a billion and invest it in a football club." right? 

So my view is that Lansdown is too smart to allow that to happen to him but, everything else he has invested in and has planned will only allow him to get his money back. I don't believe there is a massive profit in this unless something surprising happens in the future to the football, the womens game, rugby or UK basketball sides that we can't foresee. Even reaching the premier League is only going to allow some investment on the playing side without further input from him. 

I don't think this is a bad thing, we have a ground the majority of us appreciate, the team is currently out of form, but the consensus of opinion on here in the last 10 years was that we wanted an extended spell in the Championship, and we have had that. 

In another post @BigAl&Toby suggested that he was never interested in Ashton Vale, I am not sure why he spent 10 years fighting for it, spent a large sum on buying land for it then. It would have definitely been cheaper starting from scratch and the income from match days would have been higher due to no disruption while the build was going ahead.
There is also the peripheral benefits to the City that people seem to overlook, regeneration of the Ashton area, new jobs in hospitality, conferencing  etc, it all comes from the investment of one man. He has also done this with little help, and in some cases downright opposition from Bristol City Council over the years.

Why should that cost him a large percentage of his fortune? 

Over the last 55 years I have seen so much lip service paid by successive Chairmen since Harry Dolman to the progression of this club. At every turn they either took more money out of the club than the put in, or suggested investment that never came. Lansdown has done pretty much the opposite, when he has added money from the sale of shares just to keep us afloat, there has been little or no fanfare about it. 

Forget red herrings like "% of income invested" and "I pay through the turnstiles" rhetoric, combined we would do well to match what he has put into this club over his time here. I should think that he feels his £150 - 200m investment is pretty unappreciated right now, no wonder he wants to pass it on to some other sucker.

[Red-Robbo]

34 minutes ago, Coxy27 said:

There is a bit of a discrepancy between Companies House and the OS. I think you're right about SL judging from Companies House.

Marshall however, is a Director:

Along with JL, Harman and Gould.

 

Yup. Listed twice for some reason.

My point about having employees as directors still stands though. 

I think one of the problems with BCFC is the composition of the board: the owner's son and a bloke who has the profile of the invisible man, plus two people employed by the owner.  Where's the oversight?  Where's the expertise?  Who was there to say, "I don't think Dean Holden is ready to manage at this level", for example? Where is an independent voice?

We'd be much better with it, which is why I welcome new investment in the club. New stakeholders should mean the cosy consensus is challenged.

Edited November 18, 2021 by Red-Robbo

[Davefevs]

3 minutes ago, Port Said Red said:

So my view is that Lansdown is too smart to allow that to happen to him but, everything else he has invested in and has planned will only allow him to get his money back. I don't believe there is a massive profit in this unless something surprising happens in the future to the football, the womens game, rugby or UK basketball sides that we can't foresee. Even reaching the premier League is only going to allow some investment on the playing side without further input from him. 

I agree, but the investment is bigger than “sports”!

For me, the profit / recoup of football spending doesn’t come from the sports…..it comes from land….flats….houses.  As I said my cynical view is that “sports” is an “enabler”.  He doesn’t get to put flats and houses on THAT land without having done the sports stuff.

6 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said:

 

Yup. Listed twice for some reason.

My point about having employees as directors still stands though. 

I think one of the problems with BCFC is the composition of the board: the owner's son and a bloke who has the profile of the invisible man, plus two people employed by the owner.  Where's the oversight?  Where's the expertise?  Who was there to say, "I don't think Dean Holden is ready to manage at this level", for example? Where is an independent voice?

We'd be much better with it, which is why I welcome new investment in the club. New stakeholders should mean the cost consensus is challenged.

Mark Ashton has a twin too….likely just crap de-duplication in the CH Database.  But there are two Mark Anthony Ashton’s!

[Malago]

These types of thread always remind me of the Charlton fans who agitated for the sacking of Alan Curbishley after three mid table Premier league finishes in a row, claiming he’d taken them as far as he could.  
 

Be careful what you wish for.  It may come true.

Edited November 18, 2021 by Malago

[Red-Robbo]

1 minute ago, Davefevs said:

Mark Ashton has a twin too….likely just crap de-duplication in the CH Database.  But there are two Mark Anthony Ashton’s!

 

Lord 'elp us! One was bad enough. 

[chinapig]

4 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I agree, but the investment is bigger than “sports”!

For me, the profit / recoup of football spending doesn’t come from the sports…..it comes from land….flats….houses.  As I said my cynical view is that “sports” is an “enabler”.  He doesn’t get to put flats and houses on THAT land without having done the sports stuff.

Mark Ashton has a twin too….likely just crap de-duplication in the CH Database.  But there are two Mark Anthony Ashton’s!

Please Dave, the prospect of two Mark Ashtons is too horrible to think about!

Edited November 18, 2021 by chinapig

[Davefevs]

1 minute ago, chinapig said:

Please Dave, the prospect of two Mark Ashtons is too horrible to think about!

Probably explains how he sucks his own  

[Port Said Red]

Just now, Davefevs said:

I agree, but the investment is bigger than “sports”!

For me, the profit / recoup of football spending doesn’t come from the sports…..it comes from land….flats….houses.  As I said my cynical view is that “sports” is an “enabler”.  He doesn’t get to put flats and houses on THAT land without having done the sports stuff.

Thank's, that was my point, he knows he can't make money from the sport alone (it's unlikely at least) hence the joke. But he has had to extend his investment into all that land alongside Ashton Road to try and offset his investment, something he wouldn't have needed to do with Ashton Vale.

[Coxy27]

12 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said:

 

Yup. Listed twice for some reason.

My point about having employees as directors still stands though. 

I think one of the problems with BCFC is the composition of the board: the owner's son and a bloke who has the profile of the invisible man, plus two people employed by the owner.  Where's the oversight?  Where's the expertise?  Who was there to say, "I don't think Dean Holden is ready to manage at this level", for example? Where is an independent voice?

We'd be much better with it, which is why I welcome new investment in the club. New stakeholders should mean the cosy consensus is challenged.

Can't disagree with that.

[Red-Robbo]

2 minutes ago, chinapig said:

Please Dave, the prospect of two Mark Ashtons is too horrible to think about!

 I think I've found a picture of the other one:

[Blagdon red]

1 hour ago, Kid in the Riot said:

That's absolutely right. When they walk away from Bristol City, I am convinced the Lansdowns will do so having not made a substantial personal financial loss, and with the sporting quarter and Ashton Vale elements, may in fact walk away with a handsome profit. 

The company that submitted the sporting quarter application has three named directors, by the way:

Martin Griffiths, Gavin Marshall and Jon Lansdown.

All three stand to be enriched considerably by that project. Marshall seems a decent enough guy, but seems to have come from nowhere. I'd be interested to know how and why he has got himself into a position where he stands to make a considerable amount of money from a Bristol Sport project. 

It appears that the Lansdowns are now "looking after" a few of their closest allies, as the end of their reign nears. 

Nothing illegal or even morally wrong with it, necessarily, but something that I feel people need to be aware of. 

Griffiths, Marshall, and Steve and John, will surely walk away with millions between them from this project. 

Yet to most City fans they are viewed either as club employees or benefactors. That's certainly not the full story... 

I think you are in danger of mixing up being a director of a company and being a significant shareholder. It is quite possible that a director is not a shareholder at all. It seems to me quite normal for the FD of BS to be a director of the sporting quarter company. It does not follow, however, that he has a substantial shareholding or stands to make "millions" from that role. Overseeing the group finances is, after all, his day job.

[Kid in the Riot]

16 minutes ago, Blagdon red said:

I think you are in danger of mixing up being a director of a company and being a significant shareholder. It is quite possible that a director is not a shareholder at all. It seems to me quite normal for the FD of BS to be a director of the sporting quarter company. It does not follow, however, that he has a substantial shareholding or stands to make "millions" from that role. Overseeing the group finances is, after all, his day job.

A fair point. It would be interesting to know if Marshall is a shareholder. I suspect he would be, however you are right that it may not be substantial, or not as substantial as Lansdown and Griffiths', at least. 

[WarksRobin]

2 hours ago, pongo88 said:

As Ashton Vale is dead, where in BS3 or even  Bristol, would the best stadium in the world be built?

Apologies, I don't think I made myself clear. A previous poster suggested we can never improve Ashton Gate further. I argue that with enough money and time we could not only further expand Ashton Gate but we could turn Ashton Gate into the best stadium in the world if we wanted to do so. We may need to buy additional land and divert utilities and roads but none of that is impossible in a technical sense

[RedM]

9 hours ago, Major Isewater said:

As much as we moan about paying high prices to follow the club we haven’t ,or ever will ,pour in the millions that the Lansdowns have. It must be very frustrating for them. 
SL has seemingly tried every type of set up, he finally gets a top experienced bloke in and we are still struggling. 
We are a bit unlucky but ultimately the responsibility for failure to go up or produce attractive winning football lies at his feet. 

I hate to say it but I am sure the Bears give him more pleasure than the football club.

 

I guess it’s easier to be successful with a rugby club, and Bristol Bears have been slated by other fans for buying their way to success.

As for the amount he has put in, I don’t disagree but it’s all relevant too. Take someone who earns £10 an hour, it pretty much costs him three hours wages for a match ticket. If they earn say £300 a week then that’s a 10% outlay.

I don’t know how much Steve is worth now, I remember a figure of around £1.3 billion mentioned? A quick calculation makes me think 10% of that would be £130m he would have to invest if you compare it to our fan on £10 an hour.

So Steve invests £130m for example. Yes there might be a few duff deals where he won’t get his money back on players, but the land he has purchased and the stadium redevelopment not only generates income but it’s a very sellable asset too. 

Compare that to our low wage fan, once they have spent £30 on a ticket their money has gone. All they have are memories and the rest of the week to try and scrape by. 

[CyderInACan]

18 minutes ago, RedM said:

I guess it’s easier to be successful with a rugby club, and Bristol Bears have been slated by other fans for buying their way to success.

At least we’re not Saracens. Bit rich of other clubs to suggest we buy success (which we haven’t, have we). A spot of jealousy there I’d suggest. 

[DaveInSA]

3 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Nail on head Dave (St Annes or South Africa?).

Along with the accounts for 20/21, I’d really like a clear statement of at least the short / mid-term plan, and how the finances allow or constrain that.  We need to know what it means.  Does Nige have to trim more costs?  What is the plan to achieve, e.g. not re-contracting or trying to sell high earners, bring in younger, lower wages players and / or retain the best young players like Massengo.

Sustainability is a buzzword not a plan.

Scroll down - he has a twin!  

I was in South Africa for 15 years.

Now back in the West Country. And suitably bemused by almost everything in the UK.