beaverface

1 hour ago, Ivorguy said:

As a Bristolian living in a different part of the country for over half a century, this has all the marks to me, as an historian, of a typical Little Bristol attitude which we have seen too much of in our city’s story.

Its what I've been attempting to say further up, if the club want it, then JFDI !! Something other City's within the Country do.

I know its sly, underhand, and just not cricket, but sometimes if you want something done, get on with it! We're all laughing at Rovers and their lack of planning for the South Stand, but at least they're taking the bull by the horns.

TBH, I'm non-plussed either way as I won't be buying a flat at Ashton Gate or watching the basketball. I only go to watch City. Personally, I'd be happy if Wickes was knocked down and a nice boulevard was put up with a decent club shop, snacks bars, coffee shops and outdoor space, but money talks and so a profit needs to be squeezed from every single avenue.

38 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

So, what you’re saying is that if you were running a project, and had done everything right, including amending your plans to satisfy someone, and those plans had been independently approved through the formal processes,you would then, when a spurious challenge is made, give that person a million quid.

Nobody would do that in business. Not one person. Yes, BS can pay it, but it sets a precedent and is wholly unwarranted.

It’s a nonsensical point.

I'm not saying the club do anything, I'm just saying there are options open to them so that nothing is blocked.

If the club wants to hang around and wait for the JR to be thrown out, that's fine - it's their call.

I'm just merely pointing out there are other ways to get what they want if they so desired - it's a just a balance of how much they want it versus going through the JR process and waiting on the outcome\or the time for it to conclude.

1 hour ago, Silvio Dante said:

I’d say you’re wrong here. Bristol Sport don’t get the development they want by paying for a roof - they get a revised development with less houses, so don’t make the £ they expected when they put the “roof offer” out and it doesn’t cost pride, it costs a lot of cold hard cash.

The scenarios are simple.

- BS pay for the roof and have development as approved go ahead - BS c£1m out of pocket

- BS pay for the roof on the condition that plans revert to original - delay in planning, reopening of conditions, delay in construction and additional cost - BS likely still very much out of pocket even if permission approved

- No roof paid for and judge kicks out what is clearly a vexatious claim. Small delay, lowest cost (but to BCC and not BS)

It’s not about “pride” - it’s about ETM not wanting houses near to them but also wanting BS to pony up for a roof. The only logical business decision for BS is scenario 3 here.

Depends what their priority is? If its to build an area and legacy, they do get what they want.

If their top priority is to make as much money as possible, then true, it is less favourable.

I suspect even paying for the roof with the revised housing plans they'd still be in profit and have an arena.

The option is there for the club to get on with it straight away, but the alternative is as you say - they wait until the JR is kicked out.

The point I'm really making is that they can get on with it if they truly wanted to.

15 hours ago, Davefevs said:

The key bit is that City changed their plans to move part of the development further away.

I haven’t got a clue and planning, noise levels etc, but it now appears ETM can’t do their business under the noise levels and want City to pay for a roof.

How about City say “you can have your roof and we’ll go back to our original plans”!!!  No doubt revised plans lost some houses along the way and profit margins as a result.

ETM want their cake and eat it from what I’ve read.

True, but you can't then complain that the City of Bristol isn't interested in moving the City of Bristol forward, and then the club then plays the same card by saying ETM are delaying things. If they want the basketball area badly enough, then the ball is firmly in their court to make it happen.

Pain in the ass, and I'm pretty sure they'll still make a tidy profit from it all. Seems to be pride getting in the way here.

You are right, ETM do want their cake and to eat it, but so do City, and although it smarts them, they can still come out of this with the development they want and leave the legacy Lansdown is after.

Ultimately if the club had to pay for the roof to get the development, I still know who will come up smelling of roses, and also, would having a roof on ETM be a bad thing, even if the route taken to get it was underhand? It would be a win for the club, a win for ETM, and a win for the potential residents in the new houses - what's not to like? Aside from pride!

So, playing devils advocate - what's really changed?

The club offered to make a contribution four years ago, which ETM turned down, but fast forward to now, and ETM they want a contribution which the club were willing to pay at the beginning anyway?

Pain in the ass I agree, but surely if it was something the club were going to do a number of years ago, then get on with it.

Sounds like two parties digging their heels in.

28 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Not up until the weekend they hadn’t.  Annoyingly.

How about us? Are we under performing, over performing - or about right at the moment?

Let's be realistic, Steve Lansdown won't be able to go on indefinitely. Unfortunately that's the nature of the beast with time.....it waits for no man!

Therefore, whether it's in 1 year, 2 years, or 5 years, I would expect the club to be under new ownership, and one would hope that SL has the best interests of the club at heart to make sure he sells to a decent owner.

Of course, the flip side is that SL could get knocked over by a Bus and JL would naturally take the reins over, but would you particularly trust JL to get the best deal for the club?

TBH, I think JL gets a lot of stick on here - especially with all the crayon jibes for new kits etc - but equally, we hear so very little from him, maybe he prefers to sit in the background pulling the strings for his father, and SL is the public facing figure??!

I just don't know, but at this moment the better option would be for SL to line up a sound and safe investor\owner. One that can take us to the next level but without stupidly gambling everything.

I think what all of us want, is for us to continue to have a club to support, and one that is having a decent go at promotion.

I was, and still am, partial to a play on Sim Soc 6.

Bloody awful graphics, but extremely addictive.

Think it was developed by someone local in Hilsley.

Used to have a Tesco mobile contract which uses O2 infrastructure. Absolutely useless inside AG.

Now with Lebara, who I believe use Vodafone masts. Not brilliant, but certainly works inside AG if would score updates, or to browse OTIB.

I don't think streaming any video would be advisable though !

17 hours ago, Jerseybean said:

https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/sport/football/bristol-city-confirm-new-leadership-8763071

Shit, I'm gonna miss all those wonderful and varied interviews that Alexander did on the tv, radio, and club interviews. Also gonna miss that personal touch of turning up at the Hen & Chicken for an open mic session also!

I thought his running style was more akin to Albert Adomah, but aside from that, thats where the similarities end.

He's very raw at the moment, and got sucked infield a couple of times vs Plymouth leaving space down the wing, but his tenaciousness to sprint back out to close down made up for things.

On 06/09/2023 at 20:41, Norn Iron said:

I can see it now. Our new away kit is purple with green dots, in a similar style and position but resembling a Robin ( a vertical Splat or modern badge thing)!

Maybe the new shirt will have purple and green spots arranged in such a way that only "non-colour blind" people can read??!

2 hours ago, Wallystreet said:

The Hotspurs play against West Ham - British Pathé (britishpathe.com)

The very end of this includes the players emerging from the tunnel, City vs Cardiff City. Seems like it's from the 3rd round of the FA cup in 1919/20. A 2-1 win on 21/02/1920. Eventually lost 2-1 in the semi final to Huddersfield.

Is that Billy Wedlock leading the team out?

3 hours ago, And Its Smith said:

SL is probably insecure. I thought that when he named a stand after himself!

I'm still waiting to hear what the club have planned with ref. To Terry Cooper!

We have a ready made chant, and imo, up there with the mighty Millwall roar, I give you.. 

...the Doobie doobie doo song, otherwise known as the Tom Thumb theme tune.

It's simple, clean language, and causes a loud "Ohhhhh" or roar when done properly, and even better, it's unique to us

1 minute ago, Bristol Rob said:

To be honest, I don't think the stadium is the issue.

Increasingly top flight clubs have less reliance on ticket sales, television money, sponsorship and hospitality appears to be where the cash is, so further development isn't likely to be needed.

 

True, but im sure someone suggested expansion was a concern of a party wishing to invest.

I'm wondering if SL is making a rod for City's own back, by looking to create his legacy.

What I mean by that, is SL has always said he's wanted to leave a legacy, and I think the last remaining piece of that jigsaw is getting the basketball arena built and completed, and then once done he'll probably look to walk away in some capacity.

I do wonder, and there have been rumours by some on OTIB that any potential takeovers have been concerned about the lack of expandability of Ashton Gate in its current guise. I'm not suggesting this would happen, but building the arena on the Wickes site reduces the footprint of Ashton Gate and being able to be expand in that directionr.

So if the stadium can't be turned 90degrees (which is very unlikely anyway), that leaves only the Nelson Mandella flats and the houses on Ashton Road and Raynes Road as possible directions to expand into.

I guess it all boils down to the finances these "people" have, who are concerned about potential expansion. If you're talking Saudi money, then anything goes. If you're talking US money, then I think you're looking at expanding the stadium on what it can be expanded to now. Hopefully that make sense?! 

1 minute ago, Bristol Oil Services said:

You seem to be saying or thinking that Phil Alexander is here for us, the supporters? Is he not here in fact to do a job for Steve?

I seem to think that SL is the mouthpiece for the club, rather than the mouthpiece being the person employed to be.

Quite simply, how often did we get out of our seats and get excited by the potential of a goal? In short, very little over the two home games so far this season.

Let me counter that by saying, how many times did I brick myself each time Preston attacked us after scored? In short a LOT !

Forget stats, it's all about the excitement levels. If I was a Preston fan, I would have been the more confident to have gone on to win that first match of the season as they were attacking with purpose.

1 hour ago, spudski said:

Ive got a gut feeling from comments made recently, that much of the money made won't be released. 

NP in his last year of contract. Talking of life away from football. 

SL talking of building a ' nest egg'. 

I feels like both are keeping their cards close to their chest, waiting for different outcomes. 

NP says he thinks with these present players at hand, that we will do better than last season. 

SL maybe watching how well we do up to Xmas. And if doing well may release more funds in January. 

Or if underachieving...bring in a new manager and give him the funds to use. 

Been thinking something similar myself.

Normally when you have a player we rate in the last year of their contract, we get that contract renewal offer onto the table ASAP. NP is in his last year, and we've heard nothing.

The talk of nest eggs, does make you wonder whether SL is waiting for this season to be over, so he can then bring in another manager and back them to the hilt with all the savings NP has had to make, and so we rinse and repeat the last n years!

Difficult to understand what's going on, especially with both NP and SL both being very guarded with what they say about each other.

Not particularly over enamoured by Phil Alexander either, surely there should be statements from him also to set expectations. We seemed to have gone from the extreme (Ashton) who couldn't wait to blag, to the perfect (Gould), who was just about right with the amount of news he fed out, to the other extreme (Alexander) who we don't hear a jot from.

1 hour ago, spudski said:

...50 years ago today. 

But what a cracking away kit. 

Would love that now. 

See film footage against Stoke in link. 

 

No club crest on the yellow kit, or sponsorship. Also like the Stoke keepers proper green jersey as well.

13 minutes ago, Midlands Robin said:

They're still hoping the value of the land the Mem sits on is enough to pay for the construction of a new stadium at the Fruit Market. This also overlooks the fact that the stadium is designated a asset of community value which means that Wally can't just offer it up as a swap deal for a few bricks in new stadium. 

Good point, maybe by knocking down the South Stand they're making it cheaper to clear the memorial ground when they sell up, as there isn't so much to demolish and clear away!! Lateral thinking, I like it

2 minutes ago, TBW said:

Guess you didn't take note of the Man City game last season?...

Oh I did, I was being facetious!

1 hour ago, cityal said:

"Eileen Gaggle"

More like "Eileen Gargles" !!

So what happens when that nest egg is built up? Do we give the cash to another incarnation of LJ and Mark Ashton, who basically put us in austerity for the last three years?

I previously mentioned that the best approach would be for us to get a manager in who has won promotion from this division (by hook or crook) and somehow drag us into the Premier league.

NP has done this, and he needs to be backed, both where financially possible and verbally.