Lansdown the real story

[Bat Fastard]

41 minutes ago, AppyDAZE said:

I'll be honest, that wasn't the Steve Lansdown i recognise from before. Something has changed these last couple of years with him. Really disappointed when he resorted to that. The other bit I didn't like was when he got funny with Twentyman and said something like ".if they want me to go. A bittersweet day today. Well done lads on the pitch and LJ credit where it is due

Maybe has has been reading some of the insulting rubbish posted by some of the "anti everything City" brigade on this forum. The man is a saint to put up with all the vitriol - he wants what we all want - a successful club. No reason to give him the evil eye if he chooses to do it in his way.  At least his organisation is better than those who tried and failed to organise that pathetic demonstration!

[Bat Fastard]

23 minutes ago, 1953 said:

I posted this on another thread but maybe appropriate here.

The old adage of be careful what you wish for holds good here.  If SL wants to treat it as his toy, well its his money and his privilege.  The club is supported by the fans but not owned by it.  Yes we all put our hard earned cash into the coffers but it's a piss in the ocean  compared to the total cost of running the club.  So all the moaners want him to take a hike. And what would you get in his place? Some oriental consortium who want to have the club playing in lucky sky blue pink? Follow the well trodden path of putting enough in to try and reach  the promised land of the premiership so they can take out as much of the revenue as they can.  Do you think they'd give a shit about the fans? I don't.  The club won't be relegated. Hopefully the summer will see some changes and some new faces will be brought in. Someone has to take the place of Abraham and that will be an impossible act to follow. But maybe, just maybe  we'll all be back in August  in a different frame of mind.  I hope so.

Best post of the day!

[1960maaan]

Just now, TRL said:

For me the Asian Model delivers more than the fannying about Lansdown model

While at the moment I'm a little pissed off with 'the almighty Steve' we could do a lot worse. Take a few minutes to look at what's happening at Orient. For every Leicester there are two Cardiff's. 
For all his faults he does things with good intensions, he get a lot wrong but means well. He has dropped an almighty bollock with the wee man but he is still happy to throw money at our club, and I mean that. It is our club, when he has moved on fans will still be there, the support was brilliant today and I hope he realises that, it is in spite of what is going on , the club is what we love not the manager or owner.

[Sweeneys Penalties]

Just listened to the interview via the Radio Bristol site. It was a good interview and I enjoyed listening to it. I certainly wouldnt take umbrage over any of SL's comments,

He bankrolls the club.. fact. He raised the issue of a long term plan....and by God we need one. Lets be honest even in our Glory Days of the 70's the club had financial foundations built on quicksand. He backs LJ (I wouldn't), but in truth I don't see what happens off the pitch. Pemberton went...but undoubtedly form has picked up since. I don't quite get the Des Taylor bit..but if the bloke kicked me up the arse I wouldnt know who he was. SL mentioned he caused friction....there's only one way to go from there.

[ricardob59]

3 minutes ago, Bat Fastard said:

Maybe has has been reading some of the insulting rubbish posted by some of the "anti everything City" brigade on this forum. The man is a saint to put up with all the vitriol - he wants what we all want - a successful club. No reason to give him the evil eye if he chooses to do it in his way.  At least his organisation is better than those who tried and failed to organise that pathetic demonstration!

Yep we all want success for 'our' club...

But I think the point your missing is that SL's message comes across that's it's HIS club..

Which after today's radio interview, we all know it is.. 

[TRL]

2 minutes ago, 1960maaan said:

While at the moment I'm a little pissed off with 'the almighty Steve' we could do a lot worse. Take a few minutes to look at what's happening at Orient. For every Leicester there are two Cardiff's. 
For all his faults he does things with good intensions, he get a lot wrong but means well. He has dropped an almighty bollock with the wee man but he is still happy to throw money at our club, and I mean that. It is our club, when he has moved on fans will still be there, the support was brilliant today and I hope he realises that, it is in spite of what is going on , the club is what we love not the manager or owner.

Oh without doubt there are failures and lots of them,but the premise of making money back home through success of the football club (in my mind) makes more sense than SL flip flop approach to running a football club.  But as I said, I don't agree with either, it killed my interest in football truth be told

[Bat Fastard]

Just now, ricardob59 said:

Yep we all want success for 'our' club...

But I think the point your missing is that SL's message comes across that's it's HIS club..

Which after today's radio interview, we all know it is.. 

You are quite right - GT referred to him as the owner.  I guess that if you gave him a figure in excess of £100million and persuaded him that you had the brass to run the club successfully, he might sell it to you - then we can criticise you for being the owner......Is that how you think it should work?

[Bat Fastard]

1 minute ago, TRL said:

Oh without doubt there are failures and lots of them,but the premise of making money back home through success of the football club (in my mind) makes more sense than SL flip flop approach to running a football club.  But as I said, I don't agree with either, it killed my interest in football truth be told

I would not underestimate the difficulties in running a football club - very few people do it that well.

[CotswoldRed]

8 minutes ago, Bat Fastard said:

Best post of the day!

Best post of the day suggests it's OK for SL to treat the club as his toy as that's his privilege? 

That's really quite sad. 

[brizzlelou]

2 hours ago, Citychuds said:

I'd suggest people listen to the radio interview before making their mind up! I was really annoyed having read all the snippets on this forum then I listened to interview! Arrogance? Where? 

The man has openly said yes we have considered Lee's position. He didn't at all back him unconditionally, he just said they have thought about it on a game by game basis and he continues to believe that what's going on behind the scenes justify him being head coach. 

The comment about him putting more money into the club was meant in a 'yes I put a lot of money into the club too so I understand why the fans are annoyed'. At various times he said he understood the fans annoyance.

He even talked about his plans being for the best interests of the football club, at no point did he even sound like he was saying it's my club I will do what I like.

And before I get a load of abuse about being a Johnson lover / lansdown lover / gas head etc I don't believe LJ is the right man from the performances on the pitch, I do believe Lansdown will be proved wrong in his decision to keep him, and I've supported this club for as long as a lot of you.

sounds to me like some fans listened to that interview to find an issue with SL rather than take everything he said in the true context.

Deluded he might be, time will tell, but arrogance? Not in my view

Don't you dare come on here with a reasonable point of view! Lansdown is the devil and Bristol sport his harlot!!!! 

In all seriousness, when asked about the fans that have put money into the club and he said there's nobody that has put as much money into the club than himself I was a little annoyed but to be fair he ain't fibbing.

[eric04]

I'm not quite sure how people expected SL to respond to what was a confrontational style of interview. 

Some people on here would only have been happy if he said he was sacking LJ.

Storm in a tea cup. 

 

[Bat Fastard]

Just now, CotswoldRed said:

Best post of the day suggests it's OK for SL to treat the club as his toy as that's his privilege? 

That's really quite sad. 

Not a sensible way of looking at it.  If you had sunk over £100million of your cash into City, how would you view matters?

[TRL]

Just now, Bat Fastard said:

I would not underestimate the difficulties in running a football club - very few people do it that well.

I know, but the change of direction every 2 or 3 years doesn't help.

 

hence my flip flop jibes for the past few years.

 

At the end of the day he has taken control for a ego massage not for financial gain.  If it was for financial gain there may have been a bit more thought given than flip flopping of direction every few years

[ricardob59]

4 minutes ago, Bat Fastard said:

You are quite right - GT referred to him as the owner.  I guess that if you gave him a figure in excess of £100million and persuaded him that you had the brass to run the club successfully, he might sell it to you - then we can criticise you for being the owner......Is that how you think it should work?

And your point is....??

So your saying it's right to be critical..??

[Ivorguy]

I am totally gobsmacked that some people here think that interview was ok. 

SL showed himself in his true colours. Totally disrespectful of fans and a complete egotist.  I want him out of City NOW.

only just got home will post again later with detailed critique of Twentyman's excellent interview. SL not only was inconsistent re past interviews but actually inconsistent in this one interview.  Added to all his other failings is a complete lack of media no how. 

Truly truly dreadful.  

[CotswoldRed]

Just now, Bat Fastard said:

Not a sensible way of looking at it.  If you had sunk over £100million of your cash into City, how would you view matters?

I'd look at a club with over a hundred years of history and believe I had a huge responsibility as custodian of a something that means more than buying any other type of business. 

It's within the fabric of people's lives and one man's views should be respectful of that fact.

Riding roughshod would be taking bloody liberties. 

Actions should be in the best interests of the club and its supporters. If you can genuinely say that's what is happening then suggesting it's his toy doesn't ring true. If it is his toy then he's out of order. 

 

[ExiledAjax]

38 minutes ago, Bat Fastard said:

But very sensible if he is paying the bills - if there were no checks and balances the board could award themselves huge pay rises and then what would SL be expected to do?  Some on here clearly have not been heavily involved in running businesses.  Trust me - SL really does know what he is doing - that doesn't mean he will not make mistakes and misjudgements, but he is the one who will have to foot the bill for his mistakes. As the post above says, we are lucky to have him!

Checks and balances are a two way thing.

[Ivorguy]

29 minutes ago, eric04 said:

I'm not quite sure how people expected SL to respond to what was a confrontational style of interview. 

Some people on here would only have been happy if he said he was sacking LJ.

Storm in a tea cup. 

 

I only wish it was a storm in a tea cup, but I remain even more convinced that he is bad news for City.  I really fear for the future of our club.

Do hope he holds a fans meeting at Brighton because if he thought Twentyman's questions were difficult I can't imagine what he will think of the questions a number  of us going to Amex will put.

[cityexile]

17 minutes ago, TRL said:

I know, but the change of direction every 2 or 3 years doesn't help.

 

hence my flip flop jibes for the past few years.

 

At the end of the day he has taken control for a ego massage not for financial gain.  If it was for financial gain there may have been a bit more thought given than flip flopping of direction every few years

Maybe that is part of the problem now?

He looks back to when he has sacked managers, which has usually saved us one year and we go down the next. I half feel this time he is saying 'learned that lesson, let's stick with what we got and see if that works'.

My huge problem is the one he is backing! Always thought the best managers were 10% tactics, 90% man management, and it is the latter where  LJ seems most certainly on a, let's say, sharp learning curve. Let's hope he learns fast.

As for the 'vision' we may not be implementing it well, but I do think the direction is the right one. It is naive to believe we are going to buy our way to the top table. We will always be out bid by somebody in this league for the 'proven' player. The only chance we have is the one we are adopting. SL will continue to sling £10m a year or so I suspect to help out. 

We do need to be careful to avoid a Bolton, where their benefactor said, ok, 'here is two years notice before I stop funding, all you need to do is find a buyer'.

They didn't, and then they were in the poo.

Bottom line, as it always does, it will come down to results. Win a load and a lot of the anger will go away. Lose a load and the pressure will increase.

[gazza1982]

2 hours ago, Citychuds said:

I'd suggest people listen to the radio interview before making their mind up! I was really annoyed having read all the snippets on this forum then I listened to interview! Arrogance? Where? 

The man has openly said yes we have considered Lee's position. He didn't at all back him unconditionally, he just said they have thought about it on a game by game basis and he continues to believe that what's going on behind the scenes justify him being head coach. 

The comment about him putting more money into the club was meant in a 'yes I put a lot of money into the club too so I understand why the fans are annoyed'. At various times he said he understood the fans annoyance.

He even talked about his plans being for the best interests of the football club, at no point did he even sound like he was saying it's my club I will do what I like.

And before I get a load of abuse about being a Johnson lover / lansdown lover / gas head etc I don't believe LJ is the right man from the performances on the pitch, I do believe Lansdown will be proved wrong in his decision to keep him, and I've supported this club for as long as a lot of you.

sounds to me like some fans listened to that interview to find an issue with SL rather than take everything he said in the true context.

Deluded he might be, time will tell, but arrogance? Not in my view

Agreed 100% with everything you have said. 

I've had a listen and it was really wasn't as bad as some have made out. But then I guess it really doesn't matter what was said as it was always going to create hysteria with the few.

 

[1953]

20 minutes ago, CotswoldRed said:

Best post of the day suggests it's OK for SL to treat the club as his toy as that's his privilege? 

That's really quite sad. 

Like I said, its his money and his privIlege. End of.

[Ivorguy]

Just now, 1953 said:

Like I said, its his money and his privIlege. End of.

 No it is not end of, only in the sense that this interview marks the beginning of the end for this tax dodging egotist and pseudo fan.  Many many of us have finally given up any hope of City being properly run whilst he is in charge

[1953]

41 minutes ago, TRL said:

i'd have that 25% ownprofitsrule back in place, how he  can piss all over a ruling put in place to stop the club getting into a situation like 1982 is crazy, he he ripped up the safe guards and now lords it over the fans to massage his ego.  He isn't even a true fan, he was bought up on Rugby and Rovers, his son on the other hand is.

The oriental consortium idea is pretty much what we have, a owner who answers to know one and does what what he wants.  The only difference is he name is Lansdown, not an Asian name be it Chinese, Thai or Indian.  One big difference as I see it, apart from a few notable crazy owners, most of these Asian owners plough the cash in to these clubs to try an make them successful to increase the money coming into their Asian companies through asian supporters of those teams, so it is in their interest to make the club successful, unlike lansdown who is a rich man but with no interest of the revenue streams that come in as a side affect of owning the club.

 

For me the Asian Model delivers more than the fannying about Lansdown model

 

PS  i don't agree with either model, the money and commercialism in football now has killed it for me.  But I know younger people will think differently as that is all they have known, so as they will be the fans of the future I have to live with that

The difference is SL wouldnt be looking to trouser the profits as a money making exercise, so its a very different scenario.

 

[TRL]

Just now, 1953 said:

The difference is SL wouldnt be looking to trouser the profits as a money making exercise, so its a very different scenario.

 

I'm not sure you are getting the model, the Asians trouser the profits from their companies hooked into the clubs through the many Asians that support these clubs, most of the money made by the club is ploughed back intothe club to increase success and glean more asian supporters.  The club is the delivery agent for their companies,so win win...... if successful

[1953]

Just now, Ivorguy said:

 No it is not end of, only in the sense that this interview marks the beofginning of the end for t his tax dodging egotist and pseudo fan.  Many many of us have finally given up any hope of City being properly run whilst he is in charge

I doubt you or any other contributors are in any position to judge him. And you really think that a change of owner would change anything?  Look at Villa. Look at Cardiff. Look at QPR. Look at the chaos that having foreign owners bring and be grateful for what you have. The grass isnt greener.

[Ivorguy]

Just now, 1953 said:

I doubt you or any other contributors are in any position to judge him. And you really think that a change of owner would change anything?  Look at Villa. Look at Cardiff. Look at QPR. Look at the chaos that having foreign owners bring and be grateful for what you have. The grass isnt greener.

I have run a multi million pound company and in my professional opinion the man is a fool, although I grant you a rich fool. Money never equates automatically with common sense let alone good manners 

[1953]

Just now, TRL said:

I'm not sure you are getting the model, the Asians trouser the profits from their companies hooked into the clubs through the many Asians that support these clubs, most of the money made by the club is ploughed back intothe club to increase success and glean more asian supporters.  The club is the delivery agent for their companies,so win win...... if successful

And show me a club, Leicester aside, where its bought success and harmony.

[Bat Fastard]

36 minutes ago, ricardob59 said:

And your point is....??

So your saying it's right to be critical..??

No - I'm saying we should be respectful and realistic.  Some of the critics on here are ridiculous and seem to weave problems where none exist.

[TRL]

10 minutes ago, 1953 said:

And show me a club, Leicester aside, where its bought success and harmony.

 

Well you can look at tchelsea and Man City. Abramovich uses the club to invest in the UK and make money

Man City the Middle Eastern Owners use the club to invest in the the UK and make money

then you look ant the next 3 and the they have bought into brands in terms of Liverpool, Man Utd and Arsenal, where the finance is still made available, but the hooks into the clubs are making shed loads of money through the owners other businesses.  It is quit clear the model works. 

 

Leicester is an anomaly, but I have to say they seem to be taking off in Thailand after Liverpool,then Man U, if they can develop it could be interesting to see, if they break out of Thailand they could grow massively.

 

If we take the word Asian out and maybe use the words financial players, then I think that may better describe what is going on at successful clubs 

[Bat Fastard]

37 minutes ago, CotswoldRed said:

I'd look at a club with over a hundred years of history and believe I had a huge responsibility as custodian of a something that means more than buying any other type of business. 

It's within the fabric of people's lives and one man's views should be respectful of that fact.

Riding roughshod would be taking bloody liberties. 

Actions should be in the best interests of the club and its supporters. If you can genuinely say that's what is happening then suggesting it's his toy doesn't ring true. If it is his toy then he's out of order. 

 

He believes that his actions are in the best interest of the club and he talked about this and the place in history - maybe you whould revisit his interview with a less aggressive state of mind!