A Little Worrying

[NickJ]

I think this is probably just one of the many things on which you and I differ then.

Personally I think that if something is largely funded by private investment then it's only fair that those investors see some return. It's beneficial to the community irrespective of where the revenue goes.

Bristol City gets a better stadium, Bristol gets better facilities and the people who made it happen are rewarded for their work and risk. It's win-win.

Of course private investment should generally be rewarded for risk I am all for that.

But the point I am trying to put across is that in this case private investment is maybe benefitting from something which is being sold to the council, to Bristol City supporters, to anti village green petitioners, to Bristol, as being for the benefit of the community when in fact I do not think it is appreciated that a small handful of people will in all probability financially benefit, significantly, from the favours which have been given to build on green belt land.

Further is there potentially a conflict of interest in the enthusiasm for a new stadium as opposed to improving Ashton Gate? I dont know, I'm just raising the questions, its impossible to say because the financial and ownership details of what is happening have not been made publically available.

[SC_Red]

Of course private investment should generally be rewarded for risk I am all for that.

But the point I am trying to put across is that in this case private investment is maybe benefitting from something which is being sold to the council, to Bristol City supporters, to anti village green petitioners, to Bristol, as being for the benefit of the community when in fact I do not think it is appreciated that a small handful of people will in all probability financially benefit, significantly, from the favours which have been given to build on green belt land.

Further is there potentially a conflict of interest in the enthusiasm for a new stadium as opposed to improving Ashton Gate? I dont know, I'm just raising the questions, its impossible to say because the financial and ownership details of what is happening have not been made publically available.

I'm confused. earlier you were saying how building new grounds leads to even bigger losses. now your saying building new grounds leads to big profits?

apologies if I've got that wrong but thats how it sounds.

[BCFC_Dan]

Of course private investment should generally be rewarded for risk I am all for that.

But the point I am trying to put across is that in this case private investment is maybe benefitting from something which is being sold to the council, to Bristol City supporters, to anti village green petitioners, to Bristol, as being for the benefit of the community when in fact I do not think it is appreciated that a small handful of people will in all probability financially benefit, significantly, from the favours which have been given to build on green belt land.

Further is there potentially a conflict of interest in the enthusiasm for a new stadium as opposed to improving Ashton Gate? I dont know, I'm just raising the questions, its impossible to say because the financial and ownership details of what is happening have not been made publically available.

I see your point there.

I still think if it's beneficial (which it will be) then it doesn't matter, but there may be people to whom it does matter and they are not being told the whole truth.

I also think it's good that you are raising these questions. I'm strongly in favour of the new stadium and I fully trust Steve Lansdown but nobody should be followed blindly and it's right that somebody is challenging the issue.

[Slave to the rhythm]

I'm confused. earlier you were saying how building new grounds leads to even bigger losses. now your saying building new grounds leads to big profits?

apologies if I've got that wrong but thats how it sounds.

I think the issue is that we have been told that the new stadium will allow the football club to stand on its own two feet, but the football club itself may not really benefit from the new stadium. This might explain why several clubs with new stadia still post big losses.

The increased money generated by the stadium may well end up in the hands of people who have no connection at all with the football club (ie, the outside investors who appear to be partly funding the construction of the stadium).

[lanceloto]

Of course private investment should generally be rewarded for risk I am all for that.

But the point I am trying to put across is that in this case private investment is maybe benefitting from something which is being sold to the council, to Bristol City supporters, to anti village green petitioners, to Bristol, as being for the benefit of the community when in fact I do not think it is appreciated that a small handful of people will in all probability financially benefit, significantly, from the favours which have been given to build on green belt land.

I don't think Bristol is under the impression that it is going to own the stadium.

It will however benefit the city in many ways. for example when ever I visit Birmingham to see a concert or football I visit the bullring for some shopping and get some lunch at a lovely place called urban pie. This is money going to people who own businesses in Birmingham. Think of the city stadium as the main event, businesses (arena fingers crossed) will start up, and local businesses will start up around it to serve the people that visit. that's how Bristol will benefit. as for the city it would be in the stadium owners interest that Bristol City exist and do well.

[Avalonred]

With regards to the Planning information, don't forget there is still the original information on there which includes the building of houses on the site... this was removed to be able to have approval granted.

This removed planning is possibly where some of the investor information comes from!

[havanatopia]

Arsenal still haven't paid for their stadium yet. Their latest accounts show the figure still owing is around £240-250m.

Correct but i believe we are discussing operating profit here. The interest payments on the debt is no doubt on the balance sheet and accrued for.

I think the remarks made about Bolton vis a vis City are very relevant. Bristol does not have to compete with about 6 other prem clubs within a 30-40 mile radius... if/when we get there and have the new stadium we will have by far the most superior facilities this side of Birmingham and London for a non-national stadium. if you look at the plans for Ashton Vale there will be a lot of other revenue generating businesses such as the Arena, the Hotel, home sales, as well as utilising the conference and match day facilities.. i would suggest the revenue streams will surpass virtually all other new stadia built outside the big clubs.

Also, i rate the business acumen of SL higher than those at these other clubs we are discussing and add to that the lessons we can learn from all of their mistakes; all in all i think we have one heck of an opportunity to become a very profitable business.

[Slave to the rhythm]

i would suggest the revenue streams will surpass virtually all other new stadia built outside the big clubs.

Also, i rate the business acumen of SL higher than those at these other clubs we are discussing and add to that the lessons we can learn from all of their mistakes; all in all i think we have one heck of an opportunity to become a very profitable business.

All the more reason, then, to know where those revenue streams will end up - in the accounts of the football club, or elsewhere.....?

[havanatopia]

All the more reason, then, to know where those revenue streams will end up - in the accounts of the football club, or elsewhere.....?

In the football stadium company i would have thought, as they do now.

[Frome Valley]

I don't think Bristol is under the impression that it is going to own the stadium.

It will however benefit the city in many ways. for example when ever I visit Birmingham to see a concert or football I visit the bullring for some shopping and get some lunch at a lovely place called urban pie. This is money going to people who own businesses in Birmingham. Think of the city stadium as the main event, businesses (arena fingers crossed) will start up, and local businesses will start up around it to serve the people that visit. that's how Bristol will benefit. as for the city it would be in the stadium owners interest that Bristol City exist and do well.

People are under the impression that Bristol City football club will own this stadium or be the sole beneficary.

The points of other investors benefitting or even taking ownership of the revenue has not been addressed. This may be totally untrue, but who owns all the assetts should be made clear by those advocating others should back the stadium bid.

The Bull Ring is in a central location, Ashton Vale is not and will not be easily accessed by public transport. If the club also go down the avenue of surrounding the stadium with franshises like many do the benefit you mention will be neglible. Ashton Vale is highly likely to be a destination for car drivers many of whom will not spend any of their money in BS3.

[Frome Valley]

In the football stadium company i would have thought, as they do now.

A point made neither by Steve Lansdown or the Supporters Trust acting on the behalf of the club.

[chinapig]

Arsenal still haven't paid for their stadium yet. Their latest accounts show the figure still owing is around £240-250m.

Arsenal are in a healthy state and regarded as an example to others. See here:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/sep/24/arsenal-announce-record-pre-tax-profits

[lanceloto]

A point made neither by Steve Lansdown or the Supporters Trust acting on the behalf of the club.

yes he has. I asked the question in his most recent interview. I refer you to my original post.

[Frome Valley]

yes he has. I asked the question in his most recent interview. I refer you to my original post.

Sorry, but your post stated " from what I can make out" and "I think", so the answer is no.

I have looked at various pdf docs etc and the ownership of assetts is clearly not addressed.

[lanceloto]

Sorry, but your post stated " from what I can make out" and "I think", so the answer is no.

I have looked at various pdf docs etc and the ownership of assetts is clearly not addressed.

quote word for word of what lansdown said

"The owner as it stands, and its subject to advice on tax and various other things, would be Ashton Gate Ltd. It sits within the Bristol City Holdings Group. That's always been my intention and it's still the case."

I think it us fairly obvious the stadium would be under the same control ( or very similar) as Ashton gate is currently

[Dolman Block B]

This debate has been going on for ages over on www.ziderheads.co.uk

I am totally confused with the whole situation. Nick J is a superb poster over there but has posted with others that the new stadium will see us on the downslide with other clubs with new stadiums.

I cant get my head around that because Steve Lansdown says it is a 100% must happen to see the football club stand on its on feet and move closer to the promised land of the Premier League.

So, who actually thinks SL would invest in a stadium that would continue to lose money?

[Slave to the rhythm]

So, who actually thinks SL would invest in a stadium that would continue to lose money?

Nobody thinks that.

The point being made is that the Stadium will, hopefully, make money, but will the football club actually see any of that money or will it all end up being redirected into the accounts of the private investors who are helping to fund the stadium?

[NickJ]

A point made neither by Steve Lansdown or the Supporters Trust acting on the behalf of the club.

The Supporters Trust are not acting on behalf of the club and they are in the dark as much as anybody else apart from Steve Lansdown and friends.

I am a member of and supporter of the Supporters Trust but I am afraid to say they have given whole hearted backing to Ashton Vale without knowing what it is that are actually backing.

[Judge Roughneck]

The person speaking most sense on this thread is NickJ

[zookeeper]

I don't think there is much correlation between football stadium and profitability and you certainly haven't proved that with your facts. You would be better off comparing football stadium costs and revenue and looking at the return on the investment. The clubs costs are hugely dependant on player wages (86% of the average championships revenue is spent on wages). It may in fact be the case that increased revenues from a new stadium are reinvested in the club reducing the profitability, but possibly increasing the success (although for every Sunderland there is a Darlington).

Deloitte right a good report on football finances, I think they'd be jumping up and down if they truely thought that investing in stadia was bad.

http://www.deloitte.com/assets/Dcom-UnitedKingdom/Local%20Assets/Documents/Industries/Sports%20Business%20Group/UK_SBG_ARFF2010_Highlights.pdf

[NickJ]