mindjuicer Posted September 7, 2009 Report Share Posted September 7, 2009 As I understand it, most football clubs are in massive debt. Purely on the basis that players can switch clubs, City have to keep parity with wages. Lansdown is a businessman and a very successful one at that. He's willing to lose money on City but there's a very good chance he knows exactly how much money he's willing to lose. Clearly, he doesn't need Player to tell GL to stop signing expensive players like Sno and Hartley. Likewise, Player isn't the best place to encourage supporters. What I think is going on is this. Sno was an opportunistic signing. If we knew we were going to get him, we'd have sold Elliot. City's wage bill is now too high according to SL. He wants to offload a player or two and is sending a veiled signal to other clubs that we are taking offers, both loans and for January. All speculation of course. On the same theme, had a quick chat with GL the other day. We are definitely pushing for promotion and he is perfectly aware of the massive ramp up in fees/income if that happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrizzleRed Posted September 7, 2009 Report Share Posted September 7, 2009 Young talent should always be nutured (think thats how you spell it) It was close Jim, but I think the word you were looking for was nurture. If you did what you suggested, you'd need to take them to a vet to get it done and you'd have no chance of those players producing any new talent in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanhamreds Posted September 7, 2009 Report Share Posted September 7, 2009 Then the club should get their arses in gear and contact those that haven't renewed to find out why. We could theorise about it forever. But I'm still surprised that the club never contacted me to find out why I hadn't renewed. Even if they ask for blunt replies, such as "I bought it before the play-off final as I thought I might see Premier League football". that is poor,they should have at least sent you a letter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Us_and_Them Posted September 7, 2009 Report Share Posted September 7, 2009 As I understand it, most football clubs are in massive debt. Purely on the basis that players can switch clubs, City have to keep parity with wages. Lansdown is a businessman and a very successful one at that. He's willing to lose money on City but there's a very good chance he knows exactly how much money he's willing to lose. Clearly, he doesn't need Player to tell GL to stop signing expensive players like Sno and Hartley. Likewise, Player isn't the best place to encourage supporters. What I think is going on is this. Sno was an opportunistic signing. If we knew we were going to get him, we'd have sold Elliot. City's wage bill is now too high according to SL. He wants to offload a player or two and is sending a veiled signal to other clubs that we are taking offers, both loans and for January. All speculation of course. On the same theme, had a quick chat with GL the other day. We are definitely pushing for promotion and he is perfectly aware of the massive ramp up in fees/income if that happens. Agree with all, apart from elliot, if we are really pushing this year surely he/we would want to keep marv? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob k Posted September 7, 2009 Report Share Posted September 7, 2009 Its probably easier now to invest some money into city as we have some real assests to sell should things become bad - Elliott, Maynard, Fontaine,orr would probably get 9m in fees between them should the need ever arise to sell them but cost nowhere near that to buy. We should be very thankfull we have a chairman whos prepared to put his money in like SL has done in the last few years and a manager who seems able to pick up a few bargains (i know hes got a few wrong also but thats football). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted September 7, 2009 Report Share Posted September 7, 2009 Latham's summary is just inaccurate bitter crap based on his ill feeling towards the club. SL has hopefully learned that real fans are more valuable than the couple of thousand floaters who bought tickets on the off chance of Prem football and should act accordingly in the future. We are overspending on wages but our revenue is increasing as we do. There will be some large losses before we get the new stadium to allow us to take a big step forward in revenue unless we get promoted. I'm sure SL didn't agree to signings on the basis of promotion, he isn't that stupid, and that is the reason we're now looking at season long loans more than before. Ultimately, although we overspend, we can reduce outgoings by not renewing contracts before it becomes a problem. I think the level of ambition is correct, this is investment but it is neither reckless, wild nor irresponsible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CalifoniaRed Posted September 7, 2009 Report Share Posted September 7, 2009 SL has hopefully learned that real fans are more valuable than the couple of thousand floaters who bought tickets on the off chance of Prem football and should act accordingly in the future. Not sure why you are best placed to decide on why people didn't renew their season tickets. I doubt all those couple of thousand floating supporters were chancers looking for Prem Football, I know me and my son were not, had been season ticket holders for years, circumstances do change though work for example. I am still a member and do have enough loyalty points to go to Newcastle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted September 7, 2009 Report Share Posted September 7, 2009 Not sure why you are best placed to decide on why people didn't renew their season tickets. I doubt all those couple of thousand floating supporters were chancers looking for Prem Football, I know me and my son were not, had been season ticket holders for years, circumstances do change though work for example. I am still a member and do have enough loyalty points to go to Newcastle. I'd be willing to bet the large majority of non renewals had only had season tickets for one season - wouldn't you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chinapig Posted September 7, 2009 Report Share Posted September 7, 2009 Latham's summary is just inaccurate bitter crap based on his ill feeling towards the club. SL has hopefully learned that real fans are more valuable than the couple of thousand floaters who bought tickets on the off chance of Prem football and should act accordingly in the future. We are overspending on wages but our revenue is increasing as we do. There will be some large losses before we get the new stadium to allow us to take a big step forward in revenue unless we get promoted. I'm sure SL didn't agree to signings on the basis of promotion, he isn't that stupid, and that is the reason we're now looking at season long loans more than before. Ultimately, although we overspend, we can reduce outgoings by not renewing contracts before it becomes a problem. I think the level of ambition is correct, this is investment but it is neither reckless, wild nor irresponsible. Possibly so, though he did also say he thought Gary Johnson the best City Manager since Alan Dicks. I agree, though there are plenty on this forum who don't it seems. Otherwise I agree with all you say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slave to the rhythm Posted September 7, 2009 Report Share Posted September 7, 2009 We are overspending on wages but our revenue is increasing as we do. How do you come to that conclusion? If 3,000 or so season ticket holders didn't renew and there's no significant increase in pay on the day fans, how can our revenue be increasing? Revenue may increase in the future if the new stadium is built, but there's no guarantee that a bigger stadium will equal bigger crowds, just ask Darlington. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silverfox Posted September 7, 2009 Report Share Posted September 7, 2009 I'd be willing to bet the large majority of non renewals had only had season tickets for one season - wouldn't you? Without any of us having the data, you must be right, as evidenced by the number of 'fans' who came out of the woodwork for Wembley. However, and I think it likely you'll agree, we do have to feel for genuine long standing fans who haven't renewed due to force of circumstances and who are hurt to be lumped in with dabbling Glory Hunters who have since deserted us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted September 7, 2009 Report Share Posted September 7, 2009 How do you come to that conclusion? If 3,000 or so season ticket holders didn't renew and there's no significant increase in pay on the day fans, how can our revenue be increasing? Revenue may increase in the future if the new stadium is built, but there's no guarantee that a bigger stadium will equal bigger crowds, just ask Darlington. Because it's a fact? Turnover, year on year, for Bristol City Holdings: 2004 £5.3m 2005 £6.1m 2006 £6.5m 2007 £7.6m 2008 £12.3m Not seen the 2009 accounts - because they're not out yet - I would guess they are above 2008 since the season ticket revenue following Wembley will be in there. I believe there's now an even larger solidarity payment as well as better sponsorship deals, if we stay in the playoffs this season's attendances could compare to last seasons in the end which would mean more revenue since a higher proportion of POTD tickets would be sold. Not out of the question after our deadline day signings you think? SL is not investing in the wage bill on the hope that we will get promoted this season, he's building up the wage bill on the basis that revenue follows it and eventually we will be consistently challenging. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted September 7, 2009 Report Share Posted September 7, 2009 Without any of us having the data, you must be right, as evidenced by the number of 'fans' who came out of the woodwork for Wembley. However, and I think it likely you'll agree, we do have to feel for genuine long standing fans who haven't renewed due to force of circumstances and who are hurt to be lumped in with dabbling Glory Hunters who have since deserted us. I wasn't suggesting everybody who didn't renew was a glory hunter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silverfox Posted September 7, 2009 Report Share Posted September 7, 2009 I wasn't suggesting everybody who didn't renew was a glory hunter. I know you weren't suggesting that. I was just reminding people to spare a thought for true fans who couldn't renew for genuine reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
City Ben Posted September 8, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 8, 2009 Good post I've just got two points to make, I too think its a great job we have Lansdown funding the club but just because I don't actually know, does he use his own money to fund aspects like wages and transfer fees etc or is there a loan system to the club or does he input money into the clubs account at periodic intervals etc etc and my second point I think it is vitally important that we improve the scouting network especially in the Bristol and Bath area. Young talent should always be nutured (think thats how you spell it) in the home city and surrounding area. SL 'loans' City the money at a nominal interest rate. I don't know what the term is on these loans, but in essence he doesn't expect them to be repaid. How often does he do this? Don't know, maybe once or twice a year. I don't think he gives the club a monthly allowance! Every now and again everyone sits down and agress to turn these loans in to shares in the club. This means that SL starts to own more of the shares, as the other shareholders are diluted down. However, he already owns pretty much all of the club anyway as far as I can remember (percentages escape me) so this is a bit meaningless and gains him very little. Essentially the only possible way he can get his money back is selling the club. This might mean selling it to another private investor, or floating it on the stock market. A heap of clubs did that a while back, mostly with little success. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lack of Action Man Posted September 8, 2009 Report Share Posted September 8, 2009 It was close Jim, but I think the word you were looking for was nurture. If you did what you suggested, you'd need to take them to a vet to get it done and you'd have no chance of those players producing any new talent in the future. Indeed. Still we could neuter those who refuse to sign new contracts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redredrobin21 Posted September 8, 2009 Report Share Posted September 8, 2009 I'd be willing to bet the large majority of non renewals had only had season tickets for one season - wouldn't you? You would think so. Can't see too many long term holders not renewing a ticket at the present time. The club has not been in this good a position for some time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bristolcitysweden Posted September 8, 2009 Report Share Posted September 8, 2009 SL 'loans' City the money at a nominal interest rate. I don't know what the term is on these loans, but in essence he doesn't expect them to be repaid. How often does he do this? Don't know, maybe once or twice a year. I don't think he gives the club a monthly allowance! Every now and again everyone sits down and agress to turn these loans in to shares in the club. This means that SL starts to own more of the shares, as the other shareholders are diluted down. However, he already owns pretty much all of the club anyway as far as I can remember (percentages escape me) so this is a bit meaningless and gains him very little. Essentially the only possible way he can get his money back is selling the club. This might mean selling it to another private investor, or floating it on the stock market. A heap of clubs did that a while back, mostly with little success. About a year ago Steve Lansdown put in another £2 000 000. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
havanatopia Posted September 8, 2009 Report Share Posted September 8, 2009 I thought he sounded quite downbeat on the interview- probably so he can try and encourage those who are staying away to come. It does seem as though the lower gates are causing a significant problem with paying the wages/bills etc. Just hope we can stay in and around the top 6 to get the crowds in with some decent football. if we say we are down an average of 3k on last season @ £25 per walk up ticket price then that is £75k each home match.. that is indeed quite significant but i would have thought the average price at the turnstile is closer to £20 when you take under 16's, OAP's and students into the consideration so perhaps £60k is nearer the market. That would probably cover wages for 6 players a week or 3 since we have a home game roughly every 2 weeks. Not huge but of concern of course but i agree with other posters here; this is a very nasty recession the UK is in and in my view it will be late 2010 at the earliest before the true GDP figure gets back to positive growth. it remains to be seen how long the lag is for the feel good factor, probably a lot longer. New players, more marketing, opening more to the east end and kids for free etc will all help get the average back up and increase revenue by one means or another. Maybe Steve should try and do a deal with Costa Rican TV via a Football League licencing deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
easton boy Posted September 9, 2009 Report Share Posted September 9, 2009 if we say we are down an average of 3k on last season @ £25 per walk up ticket price then that is £75k each home match.. that is indeed quite significant but i would have thought the average price at the turnstile is closer to £20 when you take under 16's, OAP's and students into the consideration so perhaps £60k is nearer the market. That would probably cover wages for 6 players a week or 3 since we have a home game roughly every 2 weeks. Not huge but of concern of course but i agree with other posters here; this is a very nasty recession the UK is in and in my view it will be late 2010 at the earliest before the true GDP figure gets back to positive growth. it remains to be seen how long the lag is for the feel good factor, probably a lot longer. New players, more marketing, opening more to the east end and kids for free etc will all help get the average back up and increase revenue by one means or another. Maybe Steve should try and do a deal with Costa Rican TV via a Football League licencing deal. You have to remember Havantopia, that City made under 7's season tickets free this season - so thats £270 less that they will be getting from my little one - so it isn't just the drop in POTD tickets - its the fall in the season ticket holders that remained this season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrizzleRed Posted September 9, 2009 Report Share Posted September 9, 2009 Indeed. Still we could neuter those who refuse to sign new contracts Great idea Jim, I'll second that! So a little trip down the vets for Mr AB then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.