Has Steve Lansdown Been Good For Bristol City?

[Monkeh]

true, not great though is it? trouble is when we're sharing any change we want to make will have to be agreed by them too. as i said in another thread its shame the redevelopment plans have to consider them so much, im sure the boxes at the back of the eastend and safe standing across the dolman is to accommodate them.

will most bristol city football club supporters thank SL for this? i certainly will not, how much more more of our football club identity are we willing to sacrifice for yet more promises of success?

you'll find alot of football clubs don't own their grounds these days its for protection in case of administration,

and administrator comes in strips the business of assists and trys to sell it on,

If we (Bristol City FC 1982 LTD) went into administration tomorrow the administrator couldn't sell the ground as its owned by a different company,

and I don't see the problem with the rugby having a say because they are woned by the same man who owns us

[phantom]

you'll find alot of football clubs don't own their grounds these days its for protection in case of administration,

and administrator comes in strips the business of assists and trys to sell it on,

If we (Bristol City FC 1982 LTD) went into administration tomorrow the administrator couldn't sell the ground as its owned by a different company,

and I don't see the problem with the rugby having a say because they are woned by the same man who owns us

But surely your ground is your only real asset?

[Monkeh]

But surely your ground is your only real asset?

Players

Training Ground

offices etc

they are all sellable assists,

[NickJ]

Nick, wasn't David Moyes on the City interviewing panel last time around (Robins, McInnes, O'Driz) ?

Good point mate - I dont know.

Thinking back I know there was a story about it, though I'd be surprised if Everton would be in favour or allow it. Surprised also if it would be allowed under League rules. But if it did happen then I suppose the board at that time already covered my wish list to a small extent. A sort of non-exec director.

Nevertheless, I still think that there should be a permanent football man on the board. There must be be plenty of ex City players who could offer a lot. One example I can think of, simply becaue I met him last year, would be David Rodgers, very intelligent man, retired from one of the Bristol private schools last year and might not have been interested and probably too late anyway but there must be others.

[citybs3]

you'll find alot of football clubs don't own their grounds these days its for protection in case of administration,

and administrator comes in strips the business of assists and trys to sell it on,

If we (Bristol City FC 1982 LTD) went into administration tomorrow the administrator couldn't sell the ground as its owned by a different company,

and I don't see the problem with the rugby having a say because they are woned by the same man who owns us

i get what you're saying, but most other clubs don't have to compromise with a rugby club, that's my issue with it. ok they're owned by the same bloke but bcfc have gone from owning their own ground in which they can do as they want to only being equal partners - therefore we will be forced to compromise our footballing experience for those egg chasers.

we're not talking about little things here, we're talking about stadium design being compromised, the feel you get when you walk into the place. there will be loads of rugby stuff around, something which would be limited if they were tenants of bcfc.

bristol rugby will benefit a hell of a lot more out of this that bristol city football club.

[Rich]

Nowhere does the OP say or allude or insinuate as to what SL's intentions are. He simply states what has happened and most of what he states is factually correct.

Ok Nick, examples of the OPs insinuations and what I believe he is alluding to.

1"There is a big difference between properly investing in a football club AND blindly propping up the losses year after year whilst slowly sinking the ship - and BCFC now appears to be a financial basket case I am afraid".

(Slowly sinking the ship)

2"Until Mr Lansdown changes his philophosy as regards BCFC think investment, not chucking good money after bad things will never change".

( until Mr Lansdown changes his philophosy)

3 "Should he decide to walk away, think Portsmouth FC without the fun of the Premier League for a few years".

(should he decide to walk away)

Perhaps you did not see these as insinuations, or alluding to what is happening, or could happen, I do.

I believe that he is trying to undermine Mr Lansdown with his statements and it's plainly obvious. Stating things that are factually correct whilst at the same time ommitting other very important facts, or presenting them in such a way as to discredit Mr Lansdown, makes the use of facts irrelevent, these after all are his opinions.

[Brizzle Jordan]

It's opened my eyes to the fact we have some clowns on this forum.

Too true.

[Dorset_Cider]

A. Lansdown interest against his loans I am led to believe is 8%.

B. With Football Financial Fairplay next season, Lansdown will only be able to offer a cash injection for players. Not sure how much he is willing to spend of his own cash.

My only problem with Lansdown is he was reported to worth £800 million + this year with Hargreaves and Lansdown making a £94 million profit. Is this not a bottemless pit of money if you are making this profit yearly? If you had this money would you not just spend it? What is he doing just sitting on it on his island.

Surely any company making a profit of £94 million would be after deductions such as running costs (wages) etc

For all we know his company is paying him £200 million + shares a year (as an example) but this would not affect the final profit made by the company?

[Cambridge Batch Red]

8% interest on his loans? Isn't the base rate at a historic low of 0.50%?

[NickJ]

8% interest on his loans? Isn't the base rate at a historic low of 0.50%?

It isn't 8% it's 2% over base.

[bristolcitysweden]

He has been very unlucky with his appointments. Managers and players alike.

Long term he will come good. Best thing that has ever happened to this football club.

[Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan]

8% interest on his loans? Isn't the base rate at a historic low of 0.50%?

I doubt any bank would lend you money on a loan with only 0.5% interest, I could be wrong of course.

Genuine question. If he is loaning money to the club with 8% interest, surely the only way in which he can get any of that money back is if we start to make a profit?

If that is the case then surely the only way we can get ourselves into a posistion to make a profit would be with the help of his cash, so isn't 8% a reasonable rate?

Like I say, genuine question because I don't fully know the details of it all.

[TRL]

He has been very unlucky with his appointments. Managers and players alike.

Long term he will come good. Best thing that has ever happened to this football club.

To use a football cliché. You make you're own luck.

[Cambridge Batch Red]

It isn't 8% it's 2% over base.

Good. 8% seemed an unlikely figure. As for the above comment about the need to make a profit, the interest would be deducted from the balance sheet before profit.

[WTFiGO!?!]

wtfigo!?! - no gas here my friend, funny how you can't have a negative opinion towards certain issues at the club & you get called GAS! Open your eyes to the bigger picture instead of just fobbing posts off as gas. It seem that it's almost a 50/50 split over lansdown. Opinions by supporters are aloud you know.

Please accept my sincere apologies, being the newly self-appointed pest-control officer for the forum must have gone to my head. Must admit, you would have made the best wum ever, had you been genuine. The research involved.....

Back to topic though, me and one of my brothers, a number of years ago, met SL for the first time and proceeded to casually discusse the following days game, opinion on team selection etc, as though he was just another bloke down the pub. This is not an uncommon event, apparently. How many club's fans can say that? It's weird now we feel so detached, but I think the quick turn-over of over-rated, overpaid, under-performing players with no affinity or emotional relationship with te club we've had since our step up have not established the same bond as say, Murray, Bell, Tinman, Carey etc did under Danny Wilson. People always talk about Andy Llewelyn and I remember Colin Cramb, you know, people representing us who loved it as much as us! Sorry, slight diversion.

From what I know of SL, whatever happens, he isn't going to allow us to 'do a Pompey' like three successive joke Pompey owners did to them. I agree, taking complete control was probably a bad move, cos now it's got a bit messy - it's completely his responsibility. But, if you we're in his position would you pull the plug? Any talk of administration is sag talk, imo.

[Monkeh]

i get what you're saying, but most other clubs don't have to compromise with a rugby club, that's my issue with it. ok they're owned by the same bloke but bcfc have gone from owning their own ground in which they can do as they want to only being equal partners - therefore we will be forced to compromise our footballing experience for those egg chasers.

we're not talking about little things here, we're talking about stadium design being compromised, the feel you get when you walk into the place. there will be loads of rugby stuff around, something which would be limited if they were tenants of bcfc.

bristol rugby will benefit a hell of a lot more out of this that bristol city football club.

Reading Hull Swansea Wigan Reading Brentford Cardiff (not sure if they still do or the blues moved back to Cardiff arms park)

[Bedminster Born And Red]

Reading Hull Swansea Wigan Reading Brentford Cardiff (not sure if they still do or the blues moved back to Cardiff arms park)

Cardiff's pitch has improved ten-fold since the Rugby Club moved back to the Arms Park.

[phantom]

He has been very unlucky with his appointments. Managers and players alike.

Long term he will come good.

Any idea when his 'luck' will change?

Or will he just finally learn from past mistakes?

[downendcity]

A Devil's Advocate question.

If SL had decided to invest in Rovers instead of City, would we be where we are now and would they be where they are now?

[exiledinwatford]

To use a football cliché. You make you're own luck.

TRL - even with your "anti SL specs on" surely you appreciate that picking football managers is probably the most hit and miss element of football. Scott Davidson appointed Pulis and what a disaster for us then Pulis goes on to Stoke and is a great success. If Moyes had given in a little earlier we could have had him instead but who can say that he might have been a flop for us as well!

[sunningdalered]

Personally, I concur with those on here who see the appointment of Millen and the abject failure of the academy system to produce players of sufficient quality for the first team, as probably the only significant mistakes that SL has made during his tenure.

Millen was the easy option, but was so hopelessly out of his depth from day 1. On McInnes, I supported this move, taking into account the other available options at the time, and his appointment was understandable as a business decision. There is always the risk that a managerial appointment will not work out - just look at the turnover of managers in recent times - this cannot be ignored.

Having an academy system that produces no quality young players forces us into the transfer market every time - and, at least as importantly, forces us into signing players on lucrative, 2/3 year deals before we have seen how they will settle etc at the club. The lack of progress in this area must be directly linked to the philosophy of GJ. SL should, maybe, have had the strength to stand up for the academy system earlier? I don't work at the club, so don't know how those conversations went - I can only see the outcome.

I sincerely hope that SO'D can re-build this club on the playing side, and that SL gets to enjoy some payback on the backing he has given the club over the years. The interest-bearing loan debate is a complete red-herring btw.

[TRL]

TRL - even with your "anti SL specs on" surely you appreciate that picking football managers is probably the most hit and miss element of football. Scott Davidson appointed Pulis and what a disaster for us then Pulis goes on to Stoke and is a great success. If Moyes had given in a little earlier we could have had him instead but who can say that he might have been a flop for us as well!

oh without doubt, probably 98% or more manargerial appointments eventually fail.

But I go back to Structure, developing the football club and the direction you want to take it, then appointing managers that fit to that. We seem to hire managers then develop a structure around them... that is not a good way to operate. There is no luck in that, you give yourself a chance to succeed. If the manager fails, fair enough it didn't work out.

[exiledinwatford]

oh without doubt, probably 98% or more Manergerial appointments eventually fail.

But I go back to Structure, developing the football club and the direction you want to take it, then appointing managers that fit to that. We seem to hire managers then develop a structure around them... that is not a good way to operate. There is no luck in that, you give yourself a chance to succeed. If the manager fails, fair enough it didn't work out.

Yes that's a fair point. In reality we pick a manager because he is the best we can get at the price we can afford at the time sadly - good job Florist sacked SOD when they did!

I'd be interested to know the remit any new manager has - I bet it is achieve a certain place in the table as the top priority irrespective of playing style. I can imagine the Swansea board said to Martinez, Rodgers and Laudrup "whatever place you achieve we want you to play our type of football". Needs a bit of courage mind!

[TRL]

Yes that's a fair point. In reality we pick a manager because he is the best we can get at the price we can afford at the time sadly - good job Florist sacked SOD when they did!

I'd be interested to know the remit any new manager has - I bet it is achieve a certain place in the table as the top priority irrespective of playing style. I can imagine the Swansea board said to Martinez, Rodgers and Laudrup "whatever place you achieve we want you to play our type of football". Needs a bit of courage mind!

Exactly. And this is the way it has to be. If your manager is successful, he will get poached. You don't want to then go for the best available name... more than likely they will rip up everything that was good.

That is exactly what we have done for years (way before lansdown was here to be fair)

It needs to change.

[Monkeh]

TRL - even with your "anti SL specs on" surely you appreciate that picking football managers is probably the most hit and miss element of football. Scott Davidson appointed Pulis and what a disaster for us then Pulis goes on to Stoke and is a great success. If Moyes had given in a little earlier we could have had him instead but who can say that he might have been a flop for us as well!

TRL isn't anti Lansdown, critical yes anti no

[phantom]

But I go back to Structure, developing the football club and the direction you want to take it, then appointing managers that fit to that. We seem to hire managers then develop a structure around them... that is not a good way to operate. There is no luck in that, you give yourself a chance to succeed. If the manager fails, fair enough it didn't work out.

and that is where Huw Jenkins has got it right over the bridge

[Natty Red]

I agree with what you say Spike, the reason I mentioned 'history' was in response to your point that City fans would not say Rovers could be bigger or better than us without SL because they would see it as a betrayal. We were the bigger, wealthier club before SL arrived.

Like you say (and again I agree), as things stand NOW, with the UWE soon to be in construction without someone like Lansdown we could, possibly, have been overtaken by them if they managed to get their sh1t together on the pitch. I believe that with SL involved with City we can still stay one step ahead of our closest rivals in respect of investment in the club and attracting new fans.

I hear you but we are now bigger and attract 13K crowds when in the crap. They will not get much bigger though you would think that they are prem bound the way they go on. When I was a kid we used to have Glos cup every season and we would often have more at the old Eastville than they had. My Dad used to tell me about the old days and his comment was that we have always had the bigger crowds and support. No amount of dreaming will change that. We will bounce back pun intended. Just a bad couple of seasons that will be lessons learned.

[Jordan Tansley]

and that is where Huw Jenkins has got it right over the bridge

And the employment if SOD (and to a degree, though it really didn't work, Del) would suggest we're trying to do that now.

[weeble]

I hear you but we are now bigger and attract 13K crowds when in the crap. They will not get much bigger though you would think that they are prem bound the way they go on. When I was a kid we used to have Glos cup every season and we would often have more at the old Eastville than they had. My Dad used to tell me about the old days and his comment was that we have always had the bigger crowds and support. No amount of dreaming will change that. We will bounce back pun intended. Just a bad couple of seasons that will be lessons learned.

It's difficult to make historical comparisons and roll them forwards to predict the future. Only when Rovers are at UWE and City at AV/redeveloped AG and both teams have been in the same division for a few seasons, could a reasonable assessment be made. Who would have predicted that when City were in the old first division, that three years later they would be bankrupt and in the bottom division? Likewise Rovers went from a top level division two side in the fifties, to the verge of extinction and playing in another city within 25 years.

Whatever the future holds, both teams' supporters' predictions are probably wrong.

[bristolcitysweden]

Exactly. And this is the way it has to be. If your manager is successful, he will get poached. You don't want to then go for the best available name... more than likely they will rip up everything that was good.

That is exactly what we have done for years (way before lansdown was here to be fair)

It needs to change.

We need a business plan. What kind of football are we supposed to play? No one got a clue. Board probably don't understand the question. Should be self eveident that the ambition should be offensive football on the ground playing teams on bigger money off the park. So say it. Speak out loud. We are supposed to double our crowd and not even the die hard can't swallow this shit for much longer. People constantly screaming blue murder for ball forward should be sent to a Swiss death clinic asap. We should appoint someone with documented skill in recruiting pedigree. Person mentioned should recruit all players giving the manager at the time his ear but that guy is in charge making decisions long term..