Steve Lansdown - What he is doing for Bristol

[Son of Fred]

24 minutes ago, myol'man said:

He's in a position to make up for the wrong. It would be a wonderful gesture and a massive PR opportunity. 

Indeed it would be...

 

It's just not his way.

[Kid in the Riot]

2 hours ago, Numero Uno said:

I'm guessing he will have to make a contribution to BCC instead so that, in theory, they will build affordable units elsewhere? You can't just decide yourself that you are offering NIL and **** Council policy. It is clearly viability (some might use the word greed instead) related (he will be banging out every unit at the going rate instead of 38 of them at an affordable rate) but it's not as simple as saying he's offering nil and the Council have been screwed over.

That said, the bloke STUCK UP for Swiss Toni and effectively said the fans didn't know what they were talking about and that's certainly not a comment I will forget in a hurry despite the fact that many will.

You guess wrongly. They are saying they will not provide any AH on-site or off-site, due to viability. 

1 hour ago, Marina's Rolls Royce said:

You guess right

If a developer decides not to offer affordable housing on a new development then there are huge penalties in that you have to pay an enormous  surcharge to BCC for an  infrastructure levy which goes towards schools/hospitals/affordable housing etc. It's not the actions of a greedy developer - it's the actions of someone who has a vision on a particular development who feels that it's better to pay the penalty than mix in social housing to a particular development.

But, hey, you have your polarised opinion on Steve Lansdown and facts are unlikely to change this.

Personally, having grown up in Broadwalk Knowle and then Whitchurch Lane next to Hartcliffe, I can understand if someone is spending serious money to live in BS3 ( the new sort of Redland) then they really wouldn't want to be in a mixed development with social housing. That doesnt make it right- it just makes it a fact. Same as a dozen NIMBYS preventing a new stadium on their village green in Ashton Vale.

All of this is complete nonsense, unfortunately. 

[Kid in the Riot]

53 minutes ago, bcfc01 said:

So, 0% affordable housing isn't actually fact.

The developer (Lansdown) is offering 0% AH. That is fact. 

[Marina's Rolls Royce]

33 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

You guess wrongly. They are saying they will not provide any AH on-site or off-site, due to viability. 

All of this is complete nonsense, unfortunately. 

Ok- make it factual by proving what you say.

[CyderInACan]

1 hour ago, Kid in the Riot said:

The developer (Lansdown) is offering 0% AH. That is fact. 

Unless I’ve missed it, I thought the AH element was parcelled into the Cumberland Village development? 

[BigAl&Toby]

14 hours ago, Marina's Rolls Royce said:

Explain exactly how this will happen

Im genuinely interested in your considered reply

Common sense should tell you that.

Why else would anyone buy up such a swathe of land? He didn’t want to farm it. He didn’t want it necessarily for a new stadium.

He, like all professional investors and developers hedge their bets. Shame good old Marv didn’t follow Steve’s approach when he started dabbling with gas supplies. If he could’ve got planning for a stadium he might’ve been content.

Reckon he’s more content though with a resi consent. And as for affordable housing or any other 106 contribution when you’re in the know and know you’re in the know you’ll know how to work it.

Merchant Venturers anyone?

Hold on. That’s bollocks. Good old Steve. He’s one of us. He’s a good old self made Bristolian. 

Everything he does, he does out of the goodness of his heart. He’s a philanthropic man. He’s not having us over. Is he……

[myol'man]

14 hours ago, Marina's Rolls Royce said:

Explain exactly how this will happen

Im genuinely interested in your considered reply

OK, here we go;

Buys football club for £xxx including stadium and free car park donated by BCC. Throws millions at it each season to keep it debt free 

Buys rugby club for not a lot & buys them to the top of the Premiership increasing value tenfold.

Buys 5 plots of farming and scrubland for new stadium with back up plan for housing, just in case. Buys all of the empty units and industrial land around Ashton Gate for new Sports Village, indoor events venue, apartments and hotel.

Buys some fields up Failand to build training complex increasing value xxxfold.

You see where I'm going here? 

So I totally get what SL has done for Bristol & wholeheartedly thank him for what he's done for BCFC, but I don't buy into the kind uncle Steve persona. He's a ruthless financial businessman, who, when all of the pieces of the jigsaw fall into place will walk away with significantly more than he's put in. 

Just my personal opinion but there we go. 

Sid

[Rich]

Well well  well, I used to have a lot of respect for a lot of the posters on this site, now their true bitter twisted colours have come to the fore.

With any subject concerning a person investing their own money, no matter how much they have, a certain amount of realism has to be taken into account. I doubt any of the posters commenting on this subject would consider investing in anything, whether that be a speculative purchase, buying a property or making a contribution into a pension fund, knowing that other peoples idealistic recommendations would most probably increase the chances of that scheme/investment failing. Who in their right mind would let outside forces dictate the conditions of their investment?

 

 

[Sir Colby-Tit]

22 hours ago, Kid in the Riot said:

You can read here about how of 125 residential units proposed at the sporting quarter, the Lansdowns are offering 0% of the units as affordable housing, despite the local policy stating a minimum of 30% should be provided.

Some would suggest that is the actions of a ruthless, or even 'greedy' developer, as opposed to people with genuine concerns about the community at heart... but I'll let people make their own minds up.

Edit: sorry link 21/03165/F | Demolition of existing buildings and the phased redevelopment of the site to comprise a sports and convention centre, a hotel, 125 residential units, office accommodation, retail, gym, club museum, multi-storey car park, public realm improvements and landscaping, new internal access routes, new and improved vehicular and pedestrian accesses and infrastructure and other associated works and improvements on land west of Ashton Gate Stadium. (Major). | Land To The West Of Ashton Gate Stadium Ashton Road Bristol BS3 2EJ 

That secret underground base and army of evil henchmen isn't going to pay for itself! 

[Clevedon Red]

15 hours ago, Son of Fred said:

What!??

1982

[Clevedon Red]

22 hours ago, Kid in the Riot said:

You can read here about how of 125 residential units proposed at the sporting quarter, the Lansdowns are offering 0% of the units as affordable housing, despite the local policy stating a minimum of 30% should be provided.

Some would suggest that is the actions of a ruthless, or even 'greedy' developer, as opposed to people with genuine concerns about the community at heart... but I'll let people make their own minds up.

Edit: sorry link 21/03165/F | Demolition of existing buildings and the phased redevelopment of the site to comprise a sports and convention centre, a hotel, 125 residential units, office accommodation, retail, gym, club museum, multi-storey car park, public realm improvements and landscaping, new internal access routes, new and improved vehicular and pedestrian accesses and infrastructure and other associated works and improvements on land west of Ashton Gate Stadium. (Major). | Land To The West Of Ashton Gate Stadium Ashton Road Bristol BS3 2EJ 

The affordable housing is going in at longmoor village. But then you probably knew that. 

[maxjak]

17 hours ago, Robbored said:

I wasn’t one of them - in fact I posted at the start of the season that Semenyo would become a goalscorer and integral part of the team and I got laughed at…………..

Congrats!  ...........Robbored for showing faith

[Robbored]

13 minutes ago, maxjak said:

Congrats!  ...........Robbored for showing faith 

Not faith - it’s an ability to see serious potential in a young player and Semenyo had spades of it. Sadly several other posters only saw him panicking in front of goal and wrote him off…………….

[Marina's Rolls Royce]

3 hours ago, BigAl&Toby said:

Common sense should tell you that.

Why else would anyone buy up such a swathe of land? He didn’t want to farm it. He didn’t want it necessarily for a new stadium.

He, like all professional investors and developers hedge their bets. Shame good old Marv didn’t follow Steve’s approach when he started dabbling with gas supplies. If he could’ve got planning for a stadium he might’ve been content.

Reckon he’s more content though with a resi consent. And as for affordable housing or any other 106 contribution when you’re in the know and know you’re in the know you’ll know how to work it.

Merchant Venturers anyone?

Hold on. That’s bollocks. Good old Steve. He’s one of us. He’s a good old self made Bristolian. 

Everything he does, he does out of the goodness of his heart. He’s a philanthropic man. He’s not having us over. Is he……

.......no

[maxjak]

7 minutes ago, Robbored said:

Not faith - it’s an ability to see serious potential in a young player and Semenyo had spades of it. Sadly several other posters only saw him panicking in front of goal and wrote him off…………….

Ok......calm down.........no need to get into Semenyo Semantics?  

[Marina's Rolls Royce]

3 hours ago, myol'man said:

OK, here we go;

Buys football club for £xxx including stadium and free car park donated by BCC. Throws millions at it each season to keep it debt free 

To keep it in business and if he stopped "throwing money" it will be out of business 

Buys rugby club for not a lot & buys them to the top of the Premiership increasing value tenfold.

Where did you get the valuation from and how much has he invested ?

Buys 5 plots of farming and scrubland for new stadium with back up plan for housing, just in case. Buys all of the empty units and industrial land around Ashton Gate for new Sports Village, indoor events venue, apartments and hotel.

If he buys land for development from his own purse which is a separate venture to BCFC then that's his business and good on him. Whatever money he makes from this is not to do with BCFC

Buys some fields up Failand to build training complex increasing value xxxfold.

OK- so how much did he spend on the HPC and how much is it worth and who to- who's gonna buy it and what for?

You see where I'm going here? 

Sadly yes- up a cul de sac whilst blindfolded. You have just ried to justify a silly statement and failed but I genuinely appreciate the fact that you gave it a go

So I totally get what SL has done for Bristol & wholeheartedly thank him for what he's done for BCFC, but I don't buy into the kind uncle Steve persona. He's a ruthless financial businessman, who, when all of the pieces of the jigsaw fall into place will walk away with significantly more than he's put in. 

You really are very confused on this issue- you talk about BCFC and seem to think that anything outside of BCFC is somehow BCFC- it's not. As for ruthless - I think his track record clearly says otherwise.

 

Just my personal opinion but there we go. 

Sid

 

[Rich]

3 hours ago, myol'man said:

OK, here we go;

Buys football club for £xxx including stadium and free car park donated by BCC. Throws millions at it each season to keep it debt free 

Buys rugby club for not a lot & buys them to the top of the Premiership increasing value tenfold.

Buys 5 plots of farming and scrubland for new stadium with back up plan for housing, just in case. Buys all of the empty units and industrial land around Ashton Gate for new Sports Village, indoor events venue, apartments and hotel.

Buys some fields up Failand to build training complex increasing value xxxfold.

You see where I'm going here? 

So I totally get what SL has done for Bristol & wholeheartedly thank him for what he's done for BCFC, but I don't buy into the kind uncle Steve persona. He's a ruthless financial businessman, who, when all of the pieces of the jigsaw fall into place will walk away with significantly more than he's put in. 

Just my personal opinion but there we go. 

Sid

Just as a matter of interest, where did you get the information that BCC had donated the car park? One assumes you're talking about the East End car park. If that is the case, that car park had about a 90 year lease on it, owned by BCFC. The land was agreed to be sold to BCFC by the council, for something like £385k and be used as a car park and petrol station in the Sainsbury's development. A lot of the protesters were objecting to that agreed price, claiming that it should be valued the same as the area where the store was being built, but, that's the point, although it was part of the overall development, it wasn't where a building could be built, as it was only a car park with no footprint of a previous building and therefore less valuable.

If something has happened since, then I'm unaware and I'm genuinely interested and surprised that there have been no public objections.

[Rich]

It seems that some people hate the fact that SL might and I'd repeat that Might, make a profit from his investment in the sporting infrastructure of the Bristol Region. I can only guess what those reasons are, possibly a political nature or jealousy, it certainly doesn't seem rational.

I always supported SL and the attempts to build the stadium and other associated packages but, being loosely connected with the administration of that time but, I was amazed at how amateurish and weak it was. The mistakes and presumptions were too many and actually embarrassing. Having said that, the man drew down on his wealth and carried on investing in the stadium and other things mentioned here, as well as propping up all the sports under the umbrella over a long period of time.

Had he not left Hargreaves Lansdown and drawn his money down to make those vast investments, then I'm pretty certain he'd be sitting on a lot more wealth than he currently does.

When he left HL, he was a bit behind Hargreaves in his personal wealth, since that time Hargreaves has at least doubled his wealth £2.4 billion and Lansdown's has increased modestly in comparison to about £1.4 billion. So in a nutshell, If Lansdown was doing this for profit, he aint such a hard nosed businessman as some of you like to point out. It seems he'd have been better off sitting on his shares and receiving an ever increasing dividend, instead of receiving shit from some areas of our supposed supporter base..

[Kid in the Riot]

6 hours ago, Clevedon Red said:

The affordable housing is going in at longmoor village. But then you probably knew that. 

Erm, no. The 500 home scheme at Longmoor Village is at least close to meeting the 30% requirement, the sporting quarter scheme does not even attempt to meet it. 

[real_bristol]

I’m thrilled to read that this thread is turning into a Planning debate. 

I understand KITRs sentiment and if he’s saying that SL can get away with zero AH simply by pouring money into it then yes, that’s arguably unfair. However, this is where politics and Planning get intertwined, rightly or wrongly. BCCs policy is BCCs policy and if it isn’t air tight i.e. if there is ways around the affordable housing requirements then that’s on them. The loop holes are either there for a reason or they haven’t been spotted yet. I’m almost certain on one thing though, it will take some serious legal wrangling to avoid such a clear cut policy as affordable housing, which if I’m not mistaken, is a policy in line with the requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework, something the council’s policy must be consistent with. So, if the council “let it go” they would subject themselves to some serious scrutiny if challenged via the appeal process. SL’s lawyers might have to persuade the council in the first instance, then fight on their behalf to get around national policy, depends how far it goes. All the while the cost of getting Planning consent goes up, and viability of the scheme goes down. Possibly to the point where he might as well have just included the correct number of AH units in the first place. Furthermore, the council know who is behind this scheme so they won’t want to be a pushover because they know the more they stand their ground the more they will get, and I’m not just talking about housing, right across the planning spectrum. 

To put it simply I’d be bloody surprised if this development got away with zero AH without legal justification. 

Now I’m about to go off on a tangent, and it’s something i wanted to run past my fellow reds. The whole Ashton Vale stadium debacle was simply a smoke screen to get the public up in arms so that the redevelopment of AG, which would include a very, very tall stand and some potential loss of amenity to the residents behind the east end, is deemed the best solution. I must stress this is just a theory, if it’s true it is but a stroke of Planning genius. 

Edited February 6, 2022 by real_bristol

[Rich]

5 hours ago, real_bristol said:

I’m thrilled to read that this thread is turning into a Planning debate. 

I understand KITRs sentiment and if he’s saying that SL can get away with zero AH simply by pouring money into it then yes, that’s arguably unfair. However, this is where politics and Planning get intertwined, rightly or wrongly. BCCs policy is BCCs policy and if it isn’t air tight i.e. if there is ways around the affordable housing requirements then that’s on them. The loop holes are either there for a reason or they haven’t been spotted yet. I’m almost certain on one thing though, it will take some serious legal wrangling to avoid such a clear cut policy as affordable housing, which if I’m not mistaken, is a policy in line with the requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework, something the council’s policy must be consistent with. So, if the council “let it go” they would subject themselves to some serious scrutiny if challenged via the appeal process. SL’s lawyers might have to persuade the council in the first instance, then fight on their behalf to get around national policy, depends how far it goes. All the while the cost of getting Planning consent goes up, and viability of the scheme goes down. Possibly to the point where he might as well have just included the correct number of AH units in the first place. Furthermore, the council know who is behind this scheme so they won’t want to be a pushover because they know the more they stand their ground the more they will get, and I’m not just talking about housing, right across the planning spectrum. 

To put it simply I’d be bloody surprised if this development got away with zero AH without legal justification. 

Now I’m about to go off on a tangent, and it’s something i wanted to run past my fellow reds. The whole Ashton Vale stadium debacle was simply a smoke screen to get the public up in arms so that the redevelopment of AG, which would include a very, very tall stand and some potential loss of amenity to the residents behind the east end, is deemed the best solution. I must stress this is just a theory, if it’s true it is but a stroke of Planning genius. 

If I may say so and without meaning to be rude, this theory seems a little fanciful. He's ended up with a ground which is costly to further develop should that be required and, doesn't reach anywhere near it's potential in being able to host other matches. The stand doesn't impeach on anything in a negative way and I don't know what this public amenity you refer to is, could you enlighten me.

As I understand it, developers have always been able to argue about the amount of affordable housing in any development. Presumably that's with reference to site clearance, development cost and if it's viable and not  detrimental to the value and financial effect on the other property.

This development is not just wholly a housing development. It's main object I believe is to provide a base for Bristol Flyers to perform and achieve their potential. As such, that needs to be paid for as I understand it, using projected profits from the other developments towards the cost of the Flyers arena. The case would be argued that, if there is no profit to be put into the pot, then the arena doesn't get built, pretty much the same argument was used regarding AV, though that would still have needed topping up with further investment.

Taken into context, the other developments are providing the affordable housing required from those sites, so the applicants are asking BCC to wave those requirements on this site, to enable it to progress.

[Eddie Hitler]

11 minutes ago, Rich said:

If I may say so and without meaning to be rude, this theory seems a little fanciful. He's ended up with a ground which is costly to further develop should that be required and, doesn't reach anywhere near it's potential in being able to host other matches. The stand doesn't impeach on anything in a negative way and I don't know what this public amenity you refer to is, could you enlighten me.

As I understand it, developers have always been able to argue about the amount of affordable housing in any development. Presumably that's with reference to site clearance, development cost and if it's viable and not  detrimental to the value and financial effect on the other property.

This development is not just wholly a housing development. It's main object I believe is to provide a base for Bristol Flyers to perform and achieve their potential. As such, that needs to be paid for as I understand it, using projected profits from the other developments towards the cost of the Flyers arena. The case would be argued that, if there is no profit to be put into the pot, then the arena doesn't get built, pretty much the same argument was used regarding AV, though that would still have needed topping up with further investment.

Taken into context, the other developments are providing the affordable housing required from those sites, so the applicants are asking BCC to wave those requirements on this site, to enable it to progress.

 

Yes to all of that.

I do find it very hard to follow the logic that in order to make a killing on property development the Lansdowns buy a football club that must have lost £100m and probably nearer £200m since they have owned it.

If you wish to make a killing on property development wouldn't you just, you know, do property development?

How does losing a nine figure sum on running a sports club form part of this cunning plan?

 

Bristol City posted record losses of £38.4m last month and while they should meet the relevant Profit & Sustainability criteria for 2021, next year and beyond will be deeply challenging for the club to fall in line

 

[Leveller]

56 minutes ago, Eddie Hitler said:

 

Yes to all of that.

I do find it very hard to follow the logic that in order to make a killing on property development the Lansdowns buy a football club that must have lost £100m and probably nearer £200m since they have owned it.

If you wish to make a killing on property development wouldn't you just, you know, do property development?

How does losing a nine figure sum on running a sports club form part of this cunning plan?

 

Bristol City posted record losses of £38.4m last month and while they should meet the relevant Profit & Sustainability criteria for 2021, next year and beyond will be deeply challenging for the club to fall in line

 

Well exactly. SL will no doubt try to make a profit from Bristol Sport overall if he can, but to suggest that was the best investment available, or his primary motive, is pretty laughable.

[real_bristol]

1 hour ago, Rich said:

If I may say so and without meaning to be rude, this theory seems a little fanciful. He's ended up with a ground which is costly to further develop should that be required and, doesn't reach anywhere near it's potential in being able to host other matches. The stand doesn't impeach on anything in a negative way and I don't know what this public amenity you refer to is, could you enlighten me.

As I understand it, developers have always been able to argue about the amount of affordable housing in any development. Presumably that's with reference to site clearance, development cost and if it's viable and not  detrimental to the value and financial effect on the other property.

This development is not just wholly a housing development. It's main object I believe is to provide a base for Bristol Flyers to perform and achieve their potential. As such, that needs to be paid for as I understand it, using projected profits from the other developments towards the cost of the Flyers arena. The case would be argued that, if there is no profit to be put into the pot, then the arena doesn't get built, pretty much the same argument was used regarding AV, though that would still have needed topping up with further investment.

Taken into context, the other developments are providing the affordable housing required from those sites, so the applicants are asking BCC to wave those requirements on this site, to enable it to progress.

You may say so, and it’s not rude. Mine is merely a theory, one based on nothing but the turn of events at AV and subsequent backing of the new stadium by the then mayor. It has no consideration to the financial side of things which makes fanciful a fair response. But it is fun to think of it that way. And let’s be honest, in comparison to the AV process, the redevelopment of AG sailed through planning. The loss of amenity, if i recall correctly, is to do with loss of light or view. Now I’m not saying either occurred or that residents were not fairly treated, but presumably the new south stand is bigger than the old east end. I was just referring to it as one of the hurdles in planning for the new AG. 
 

The rest of what you say makes sense. I always thought if you’re including residential over a certain number of units you had to provide AH, but there must be ways around it if it renders development unviable. 

Edited February 6, 2022 by real_bristol

[robin_unreliant]

On 05/02/2022 at 16:29, Rich said:

It seems that some people hate the fact that SL might and I'd repeat that Might, make a profit from his investment in the sporting infrastructure of the Bristol Region. I can only guess what those reasons are, possibly a political nature or jealousy, it certainly doesn't seem rational.

I always supported SL and the attempts to build the stadium and other associated packages but, being loosely connected with the administration of that time but, I was amazed at how amateurish and weak it was. The mistakes and presumptions were too many and actually embarrassing. Having said that, the man drew down on his wealth and carried on investing in the stadium and other things mentioned here, as well as propping up all the sports under the umbrella over a long period of time.

Had he not left Hargreaves Lansdown and drawn his money down to make those vast investments, then I'm pretty certain he'd be sitting on a lot more wealth than he currently does.

When he left HL, he was a bit behind Hargreaves in his personal wealth, since that time Hargreaves has at least doubled his wealth £2.4 billion and Lansdown's has increased modestly in comparison to about £1.4 billion. So in a nutshell, If Lansdown was doing this for profit, he aint such a hard nosed businessman as some of you like to point out. It seems he'd have been better off sitting on his shares and receiving an ever increasing dividend, instead of receiving shit from some areas of our supposed supporter base..

I bet Steve is glad he didn't just sit on his HL shares now. They have gone from over £24 a couple of years ago to under a tenner now. We know he has diversified out of HL, not just spent it on Bristol Sport. Still, I believe he still owns something like 6% of HL, so a not inconsiderable loss for him. I'm sure he can still pay his heating bill though. 

[Lanterne Rouge]

2 minutes ago, robin_unreliant said:

I bet Steve is glad he didn't just sit on his HL shares now. They have gone from over £24 a couple of years ago to under a tenner now. We know he has diversified out of HL, not just spent it on Bristol Sport. Still, I believe he still owns something like 6% of HL, so a not inconsiderable loss for him. I'm sure he can still pay his heating bill though. 

A big TV ad campaign going on at the moment too. I don`t think I`ve seen HL do that before.

[Shelton’s Love Gravy]

On 04/02/2022 at 13:12, TheCerneAbbasGiant said:I also shook hands with Brian Tinnion and told him I loved him. 

Did he reward you with Man-Love?

[Oh Louie louie]

Jesus what a thought above.

The cerneabbasgiant is more well endowed, than the uffington white horse!

[Oh Louie louie]

My ex mrs showed no intrest, whatsoever when we drove past the bescot stadium.

Yet she loved driving past the giant.

There rumours, the cerneabbasgiant may sign for dorchester town this season.

Its hush hush, hes currently attached to a club...

[Pezo]

11 hours ago, Lanterne Rouge said:

A big TV ad campaign going on at the moment too. I don`t think I`ve seen HL do that before.

Loads of competition at the moment from other players that are frankly better value. While HL sold itself on being low cost there are now platforms that are an even lower cost.