The Lansdowns are a pox on our club

[The Swan and Cemetery]

3 minutes ago, maxjak said:

The major problem seems to have been,  that SL has failed to have taken advice and guidance from senior football figures when making appointments and crucial decisions?  Because he achieved great success in business, he has seemingly to have taken it as read that his own  perceived football acumen would have similar results?

If he had put aside his ego and taken counsel from knowledgeable football figures for advice, then maybe the outcome could and should have been so much better?

Unfortunately, Ashton’s role was probably exactly what was needed, but the individual was the opposite - someone with decent football knowledge, business acumen and competence and we might be able to a have a manager much more oriented towards coaching, rather than sorting out a lot of the background mess. As it is Pearson has to dedicate much of his efforts to off pitch problems (and rightly so in my view - this is O’Driscoll 2.0, frustrating on the pitch, but when he’s gone, we’ll be glad of what he sorted out). 

[Cowshed]

5 hours ago, Bat Fastard said:

Apart from the beautiful stadium, the state of the art training ground, the excellent academy and the fact that we have lasted in the Championship- what have the Lansdowns ever done for us??

Beauty is a perception, but we can measure excellence. Excellence would be category 1/player development efficiency. Bristol Citys academy is not cat 1 and not ranked in the top 15 academies in England for developing players = It is perfoming well, but not excellent. 

Your use of state of the art would indicate you feel BCFC have a training facility of the highest level. Versus the South West yes, but versus facilities at Villa, or Leicester or Southampton or many Championship sides and virtually all Premiership clubs its a big big no. 

[Davefevs]

5 hours ago, gl2 said:

This beautiful stadium do we as a club have any say on who plays in it? and how much % wise do we get from concerts etc that also hire it? is it free for us to use it and its bars etc do we get that income? gen interested as anyone who is interested in buying us would they not also have to purchase the stadium as well?

Without getting into accounting “stuff” (and I’m not an Accountant anyway), for FFP purposes, we join BCFC Ltd with Ashton Gate Ltd and submit combined.

So any money AG makes from concerts helps us.

Any rent charged by AG to Bristol Bears helps us.

AG charges Bristol City rent too, but with all these “internal money transfers” one gains the other loses, so nets off in a simple world.

AG pays the interest on the loan to SL.

AG pays the cost of the stadium depreciation each year.

Re new investment, I can’t see why anyone would want to buy the football club alone in its current guise.  If it was knocking on the door of the PL, that future £100m+ p.a. would make it attractive.  But they could buy it without the stadium if they chose to.

4 hours ago, Bedred31 said:

People who think the Landsdowns are ‘a pox’ need to explain where the £20m + pa to cover our losses is going to come from without them? Vague ‘financial consortiums’ don’t come up with that sort of write off money, fans like SL do. And while I dare say that some is the spending under Junior/ Ashdown was unwise, these were the players ( ie this was the spending ) that allowed us to compete in the top half of the Championship. People on here who complain about ‘deadwood’ and ‘financial mismanagement’ really understand nothing about modern football, the effects of Covid or FFP. SL is a great chairman and when he’s gone- and I dare say he will be soon- we’re going to miss him mightily.

LB gets my view pretty right.

4 hours ago, LondonBristolian said:

Personally I think all discussions on the Lansdowns quickly fly to extremes. They aren’t a ‘pox’ on the club and plenty of clubs have far worse owners but we also get a bit stuck on the idea that, if they went, there is absolutely nobody else out there who would not destroy the club.

Truthfully - whether you feel it should have happened quicker or not - Lansdown has got us to a point where we have the foundations of a top flight club - in terms of quality of stadium, training ground and academy - but a combination of bad luck and the wrong decisions at the wrong time have meant he has not delivered top flight football and he has clearly reached a point where he needs the club to wash its own face - which few clubs do, especially whilst succeeding on the pitch - and is at least open to, and perhaps very keen on, selling out entirely.

Of course there are risks with a sale that we end up with a Sisu, a Mike Ashley or whoever it is at Charlton but we could also end up with a new owner who can take the facilities in place and appoint the necessary football people to finally deliver.

 

[Davefevs]

29 minutes ago, The Swan and Cemetery said:

Unfortunately, Ashton’s role was probably exactly what was needed, but the individual was the opposite - someone with decent football knowledge, business acumen and competence and we might be able to a have a manager much more oriented towards coaching, rather than sorting out a lot of the background mess. As it is Pearson has to dedicate much of his efforts to off pitch problems (and rightly so in my view - this is O’Driscoll 2.0, frustrating on the pitch, but when he’s gone, we’ll be glad of what he sorted out). 

Yes he ran the West Brom Community stuff, and blagged that through his mentor Mike O’Leary to get jobs at Watford and Oxford.  Then us, then back under O’Leary at Ipswich.

[eardun]

4 hours ago, Merrick's Marvels said:

Some of us don't judge ourselves against the gas, Swindon and Plymouth, mate. We need to set the bar higher than that!

Some just wonder why a club from the 8th biggest city in the country, with so many obvious advantages over about 75% of other professional clubs, continues to be such an under achieving mess - year after year after year.

One of the reasons for that is because some people are just happy we're doing better than the gas, Swindon and Plymouth, btw! 

That sort of mediocre mindset is one of a multitude of problems Pearson has to contend with here. It may even be the thing that defeats him - that not enough people want it, really want success down to their bones, want it so much it hurts.

Perhaps Bristol City - from whoever the owner is at the top, through whoever works for the club on and off the pitch, to whoever supports it from the stands - doesn't want success so much that it hurts? Perhaps we're all happy to just be doing ok, so long as it's better than the gas and Swindon and Plymouth? Perhaps it's something in the water or it's the Bristol DNA - success is nice but we can take it or leave at the end of the day?

What else can explain over 100 years of mediocrity, given all that we'vegot going for us? 

Imo Pearson isn't just trying to fix a leaky back 4, wobbly keepers, a non existent midfield, players eyeing more money and new contracts elsewhere, players offered less money to stay, an FFP blackhole - the death star that's sucking us backwards towards League 1. That's not all he's got on his plate. That's not all he's trying to fix.

Whether he realises it or not, he's also trying to fix Bristol and Bristolians. He's wrestling with a question of attitude, of mentality. And it might be the one thing that beats him, like it's beaten so many before.

Pray God, it doesn't. 

"Somerset, and the livin is easy, wurzels sleepin cos the cider is dry" as George Gershwin so accurately wrote. 

This is precisely what Pearson was saying re attitude and mentality in his pre-match press conference. So he certainly realises it and that is precisely the reason why I disagree with the sentiment that it is time for Pearson to go. There are not many managers who would have the balls to take it on and to see it through. 

Edited December 27, 2022 by eardun

[CiderJar]

I've only read 5 or 6 replies but I'm astounded. Can you imagine, or even remember, what it would be like without the Lansdowns? We've made huge strides as a club and memories of what it was like before seem very short.

[BigTone]

7 minutes ago, CiderJar said:

I've only read 5 or 6 replies but I'm astounded. Can you imagine, or even remember, what it would be like without the Lansdowns? We've made huge strides as a club and memories of what it was like before seem very short.

I think we need to be very cautious as to what we wish for as replacements. 

[sh1t_ref_again]

4 hours ago, cidered abroad said:

Football League is nationwide.

Not just the South West & South Wales league!

 

3 hours ago, Merrick's Marvels said:

Some of us don't judge ourselves against the gas, Swindon and Plymouth, mate. We need to set the bar higher than that!

Some just wonder why a club from the 8th biggest city in the country, with so many obvious advantages over about 75% of other professional clubs, continues to be such an under achieving mess - year after year after year.

One of the reasons for that is because some people are just happy we're doing better than the gas, Swindon and Plymouth, btw! 

That sort of mediocre mindset is one of a multitude of problems Pearson has to contend with here. It may even be the thing that defeats him - that not enough people want it, really want success down to their bones, want it so much it hurts.

Perhaps Bristol City - from whoever the owner is at the top, through whoever works for the club on and off the pitch, to whoever supports it from the stands - doesn't want success so much that it hurts? Perhaps we're all happy to just be doing ok, so long as it's better than the gas and Swindon and Plymouth? Perhaps it's something in the water or it's the Bristol DNA - success is nice but we can take it or leave at the end of the day?

What else can explain over 100 years of mediocrity, given all that we'vegot going for us? 

Imo Pearson isn't just trying to fix a leaky back 4, wobbly keepers, a non existent midfield, players eyeing more money and new contracts elsewhere, players offered less money to stay, an FFP blackhole - the death star that's sucking us backwards towards League 1. That's not all he's got on his plate. That's not all he's trying to fix.

Whether he realises it or not, he's also trying to fix Bristol and Bristolians. He's wrestling with a question of attitude, of mentality. And it might be the one thing that beats him, like it's beaten so many before.

Pray God, it doesn't. 

"Somerset, and the livin is easy, wurzels sleepin cos the cider is dry" as George Gershwin so accurately wrote. 

 

3 hours ago, ZiderMeUp said:

Swindon and Cardiff both been in the prem. Cardiff twice.  Although swindon before lansdowns time

The point I was making in reply to the poster who named a few clubs that had been successful to demonstrate we were failing, I picked those clubs as they were our historic rivals and generally 20 plus years ago had been around the same divisions

If you look at some of the clubs that we were in the same division as in 02/03 whan SL took over, a fair few have not progressed as well, let alone had years of steady football in the championship Wigan, Crewe, Oldham, Tranmere, Plymouth, Swindon, Peterborough, Colchester, Stockport, Port Vale, Wycombe, Barnsley, Chesterfield, Cheltenham, Mansfield, 
Northampton 

Or teams that were in the division above us Portsmouth, Ipswich, Wimbledon, Gillingham, Walsaw, Derby, Bradford, Sheffield Wednesday

Of course there are many teams that have done well, some have had their day in the sun by splashing cash and now paying for it and as others have posted what could be achieved before FFP became so strict, others have pushed on and still in the prem or established championship teams

Size of city, crowds, cheque book, ambition or anything else is not a guarantee of being able to get promoted to the prem. You make well intention decisions without the luxury of hindsight 

 

 

[Merrick's Marvels]

20 minutes ago, sh1t_ref_again said:

Size of city, crowds, cheque book, ambition or anything else is not a guarantee of being able to get promoted to the prem. 

You're absolutely right, it isn't a guarantee. We're living proof of that. 

But all those things are an advantage if a club is run competently, by competent people,  making competent decisions.

By and large, we haven't been.

By and large, we've been the opposite - incompetent.  Incompetent FC. Just one of too many pejorative adjectives you could apply to Bristol City FC. 

And that's what drives most of us to distraction - the ridiculous, laughable, criminal, frustrating, incompetent (more adjectives are available) waste of the massive potential that is BCFC. 

Edited December 27, 2022 by Merrick's Marvels

[sh1t_ref_again]

9 minutes ago, Merrick's Marvels said:

You're absolutely right, it isn't a guarantee. We're living proof of that. 

But all those things are an advantage if a club is run competently, by competent people,  making competent decisions.

By and large, we haven't been.

By and large, we've been the opposite - incompetent.  Incompetent FC. Just one of too many pejorative adjectives you could apply to Bristol City FC. 

And that's what drives most of us to distraction - the ridiculous, laughable, criminal, frustrating, incompetent (more adjectives are available) waste of the massive potential that is BCFC. 

So what is your definition of success, reaching the prem?

[cidered abroad]

5 hours ago, Merrick's Marvels said:

Some of us don't judge ourselves against the gas, Swindon and Plymouth, mate. We need to set the bar higher than that!

Some just wonder why a club from the 8th biggest city in the country, with so many obvious advantages over about 75% of other professional clubs, continues to be such an under achieving mess - year after year after year.

One of the reasons for that is because some people are just happy we're doing better than the gas, Swindon and Plymouth, btw! 

That sort of mediocre mindset is one of a multitude of problems Pearson has to contend with here. It may even be the thing that defeats him - that not enough people want it, really want success down to their bones, want it so much it hurts.

Perhaps Bristol City - from whoever the owner is at the top, through whoever works for the club on and off the pitch, to whoever supports it from the stands - doesn't want success so much that it hurts? Perhaps we're all happy to just be doing ok, so long as it's better than the gas and Swindon and Plymouth? Perhaps it's something in the water or it's the Bristol DNA - success is nice but we can take it or leave at the end of the day?

What else can explain over 100 years of mediocrity, given all that we'vegot going for us? 

Imo Pearson isn't just trying to fix a leaky back 4, wobbly keepers, a non existent midfield, players eyeing more money and new contracts elsewhere, players offered less money to stay, an FFP blackhole - the death star that's sucking us backwards towards League 1. That's not all he's got on his plate. That's not all he's trying to fix.

Whether he realises it or not, he's also trying to fix Bristol and Bristolians. He's wrestling with a question of attitude, of mentality. And it might be the one thing that beats him, like it's beaten so many before.

Pray God, it doesn't. 

"Somerset, and the livin is easy, wurzels sleepin cos the cider is dry" as George Gershwin so accurately wrote. 

Nail on the head, especially the last two paragraphs.

[cidered abroad]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

Without getting into accounting “stuff” (and I’m not an Accountant anyway), for FFP purposes, we join BCFC Ltd with Ashton Gate Ltd and submit combined.

So any money AG makes from concerts helps us.

Any rent charged by AG to Bristol Bears helps us.

AG charges Bristol City rent too, but with all these “internal money transfers” one gains the other loses, so nets off in a simple world.

AG pays the interest on the loan to SL.

AG pays the cost of the stadium depreciation each year.

Re new investment, I can’t see why anyone would want to buy the football club alone in its current guise.  If it was knocking on the door of the PL, that future £100m+ p.a. would make it attractive.  But they could buy it without the stadium if they chose to.

LB gets my view pretty right.

 

The "RENT" that we pay is not really rent. Before Bristol Sport existed the football club had to employ a ground staff and a ticket office staff. Maybe some other non football items.

Now, those people are employed by Bristol Sport and I assume that BCFC must pay for those items otherwise the EFL would accuse us of not entering all costs on our FFP report.

We gain some benefit from the fact that Bears are also paying their share of the stadium costs; probably about 35% as they play fewer games in their season.

[Davefevs]

6 minutes ago, cidered abroad said:

The "RENT" that we pay is not really rent. Before Bristol Sport existed the football club had to employ a ground staff and a ticket office staff. Maybe some other non football items.

Now, those people are employed by Bristol Sport and I assume that BCFC must pay for those items otherwise the EFL would accuse us of not entering all costs on our FFP report.

We gain some benefit from the fact that Bears are also paying their share of the stadium costs; probably about 35% as they play fewer games in their season.

No, it’s rent, paid by BC to AG at an arms length agreement.  It is a few / rent to cover the costs of AG, depreciation, loan interest, staff, etc.  The ground staff are paid by AG.

Ticketing, marketing is provided by BS, and BC pay them to do so, again at arms length agreement as separate company.

We are probably saying the sane things in different ways though.

[Merrick's Marvels]

1 hour ago, sh1t_ref_again said:

So what is your definition of success, reaching the prem?

Reaching the Prem is what the owner has talked about since he got here.

It's what umpteen managers, including the present incumbent, have talked about.

So I think we can assume that's the goal, that's success.

What I'm happy with is neither here nor there.

Edited December 27, 2022 by Merrick's Marvels

[sh1t_ref_again]

1 minute ago, Merrick's Marvels said:

It's what the owner has talked about since he got here.

It's what umpteen managers, including the present incumbent, have talked about.

So I think we can assume that's the goal. 

What I'm happy with is neither here nor there.

The prem is everyone's goal who are not in it, but that is not necessarily what dictates success or failure

As you are being critical, you must have an opinion as to what success means

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

No, it’s rent, paid by BC to AG at an arms length agreement.  It is a few / rent to cover the costs of AG, depreciation, loan interest, staff, etc.  The ground staff are paid by AG.

Ticketing, marketing is provided by BS, and BC pay them to do so, again at arms length agreement as separate company.

We are probably saying the sane things in different ways though.

So any potential buyer would have to buy the whole thing BS/AG/BC ? the loan/interest for the updating of the stadium from SL where does that go AG/BS/SL or ????? seems way more complicated than just plain old BCFC

[Merrick's Marvels]

1 hour ago, CiderJar said:

 We've made huge strides as a club and memories of what it was like before seem very short.

So, the posts you haven't read do say that yes we have made strides, some very necessary ones at that (stadium/academy), but where it really matters - the ultimate stride forward - is on the pitch. And there, we're no further forward than before he arrived. 

Given Mr Lansdown continually states the Prem is the aim - and he's sacked managers for failing to deliver even the play-offs - I don't think it's unreasonable for some people to question his leadership when we continually fail to deliver the ultimate goal he himself has stated we are aiming for. 

Edited December 27, 2022 by Merrick's Marvels

[Merrick's Marvels]

9 minutes ago, sh1t_ref_again said:

The prem is everyone's goal who are not in it, but that is not necessarily what dictates success or failure

As you are being critical, you must have an opinion as to what success means

Which part of my original post is being critical? 

[Davefevs]

4 minutes ago, gl2 said:

So any potential buyer would have to buy the whole thing BS/AG/BC ? the loan/interest for the updating of the stadium from SL where does that go AG/BS/SL or ????? seems way more complicated than just plain old BCFC

They don’t have to, Pula Sport is split into several companies

simple picture thanks Coppello

more detailed picture thanks Exiled Ajax

It could be split up as desired.  But my view is that the football club without the stadium would be very low value, and I don’t think SL is prepared to sell (any of it) on the cheap.

[sh1t_ref_again]

3 minutes ago, Merrick's Marvels said:

Which part of my original post is being critical? 

 

1 hour ago, Merrick's Marvels said:

You're absolutely right, it isn't a guarantee. We're living proof of that. 

But all those things are an advantage if a club is run competently, by competent people,  making competent decisions.

By and large, we haven't been.

By and large, we've been the opposite - incompetent.  Incompetent FC. Just one of too many pejorative adjectives you could apply to Bristol City FC. 

And that's what drives most of us to distraction - the ridiculous, laughable, criminal, frustrating, incompetent (more adjectives are available) waste of the massive potential that is BCFC. 

Sounds fairly critical to me

[Merrick's Marvels]

6 minutes ago, sh1t_ref_again said:

 

Sounds fairly critical to me

So you're saying we've been competently run? 

Fair enough. 

[sh1t_ref_again]

2 minutes ago, Merrick's Marvels said:

So you're saying we've been competently run? 

Fair enough. 

You still chose not to answer if being in the prem was your measure of success

I don't agree with the vitriol and nonsense posted by some on here, which always seems to happen after a few losses. Has SL made mistakes, yes, could we have done better, yes, but its very easy to be critical of decisions with hindsight, FFS I can win the lottery every week with hindsight.

In general we are a well run club, who have had a long run at championship level, we are stable without risk of going out of business anytime soon as the owner is happy to underwrite the losses you incur running a football club.

We are in a tough FFP position, mainly due to the gamble of investing more money and backing Ashtons plan to trade players, coupled with some bad luck with injuries etc.

What would new owners bring? you can't put in anymore money due to FFP, so unless they have some cunning scheme of how to circumvent the system which in turn puts the club at risk, I don't see any benefit, so better the devil you know than the one you don't, as long as SL is prepared to invest the maximum he can.

It never an easy ride when trying to change, it seems that SL is listening to NP who is trying to change the culture and some of the unseen problems behind closed doors, our biggest risk is panic and going on a different course

[The Swan and Cemetery]

Don’t really get the extent to which lots seem to think we’ve massively under performed:

Since Divisions 1 to 4 introduced: 60% of seasons in top 2 divisions (4 in the top division, 37 in the second)

Since 1996 (SL’s first involvement?): 56% in the Championship

Since 2002 (SL chairman?): 67% in the Championship

Understand we’d want to have experienced the Premier League and are frustrated that some smaller clubs have (but equally lots of big clubs have spent quality time in lower divisions), but struggle to see it as ‘abject failure’ etc, more not getting what we want in a context when everyone is trying to go up, but not everyone can - we also haven’t gone down much. 

[CiderJar]

38 minutes ago, Merrick's Marvels said:

So, the posts you haven't read do say that yes we have made strides, some very necessary ones at that (stadium/academy), but where it really matters - the ultimate stride forward - is on the pitch. And there, we're no further forward than before he arrived. 

Given Mr Lansdown continually states the Prem is the aim - and he's sacked managers for failing to deliver even the play-offs - I don't think it's unreasonable for some people to question his leadership when we continually fail to deliver the ultimate goal he himself has stated we are aiming for. 

The trouble with apportioning blame to Steve Lansdown is that it is not an exact science. That goal can be missed even with exactly the right approach. We are the example of that. The fact that it hasn't happened is not a failure of leadership. If that were the case 24 teams would be promoted to the Premier league every season. All are stating that as their goal. I'm struggling to understand what Lansdown as an individual investor should be doing differently. Any ideas? In my opinion we are so much further forward than when he arrived, and even further forward than when we made the play off final and failed. 

[Merrick's Marvels]

7 minutes ago, sh1t_ref_again said:

I don't agree with the vitriol and nonsense posted by some on here, which always seems to happen after a few losses. Has SL made mistakes, yes, could we have done better, yes, but its very easy to be critical of decisions with hindsight, FFS I can win the lottery every week with hindsight.

In general we are a well run club, who have had a long run at championship level, we are stable without risk of going out of business anytime soon as the owner is happy to underwrite the losses you incur running a football club.

We are in a tough FFP position, mainly due to the gamble of investing more money and backing Ashtons plan to trade players, coupled with some bad luck with injuries etc.

What would new owners bring? you can't put in anymore money due to FFP, so unless they have some cunning scheme of how to circumvent the system which in turn puts the club at risk, I don't see any benefit, so better the devil you know than the one you don't, as long as SL is prepared to invest the maximum he can.

It never an easy ride when trying to change, it seems that SL is listening to NP who is trying to change the culture and some of the unseen problems behind closed doors, our biggest risk is panic and going on a different course

Yep, agree with most of that.

But we are not a successful football club, we are a massively under achieving one both right here, right now and in the bigger, historical context.

[RedM]

6 hours ago, daored said:

FFP is a problem that we have to work around, but for me the question is who is responsible for putting us in this position, who approved the high wages / expenditure 

It was done under Ashton's watch of course, and of course he has had his fun and is working elsewhere. Unfortunately we now have had to spend years mopping up his mess.

I am really concerned though how a club employee, as highly trusted as he was, was able to do so much damage for so long without ringing alarm bells somewhere. Who exactly was watching him, who was he reporting too?!

I don't think the Lansdown are a 'pox', that's harsh and disrespectful. I do think though that they have to 'up their game' and be more involved, Jon at least must step up to the role. Same with Pearson if he stays, he has to deliver.

For what it's worth I think Richard Gould has been excellent, really knows his stuff and will be a big loss. I hope the next bloke will be as good as him.

[Davefevs]

10 minutes ago, RedM said:

It was done under Ashton's watch of course, and of course he has had his fun and is working elsewhere. Unfortunately we now have had to spend years mopping up his mess.

I am really concerned though how a club employee, as highly trusted as he was, was able to do so much damage for so long without ringing alarm bells somewhere. Who exactly was watching him, who was he reporting too?!

I don't think the Lansdown are a 'pox', that's harsh and disrespectful. I do think though that they have to 'up their game' and be more involved, Jon at least must step up to the role. Same with Pearson if he stays, he has to deliver.

For what it's worth I think Richard Gould has been excellent, really knows his stuff and will be a big loss. I hope the next bloke will be as good as him.

Reporting into SL but as SL in Guernsey, JL was his ground-operative.

SL’s heart completely in the right place, just a bit misguided imho.

Agree re RG.

[Bristol Oil Services]

27 minutes ago, The Swan and Cemetery said:

Don’t really get the extent to which lots seem to think we’ve massively under performed:

Since Divisions 1 to 4 introduced: 60% of seasons in top 2 divisions (4 in the top division, 37 in the second)

Since 1996 (SL’s first involvement?): 56% in the Championship

Since 2002 (SL chairman?): 67% in the Championship

Understand we’d want to have experienced the Premier League and are frustrated that some smaller clubs have (but equally lots of big clubs have spent quality time in lower divisions), but struggle to see it as ‘abject failure’ etc, more not getting what we want in a context when everyone is trying to go up, but not everyone can - we also haven’t gone down much. 

Using the record of our previous owners here to judge the current one by? We're not in competition with ourselves, we're in competition with Luton, Millwall, Swansea, Cov ....

[RedM]

3 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Reporting into SL but as SL in Guernsey, JL was his ground-operative.

SL’s heart completely in the right place, just a bit misguided imho.

Agree re RG.

I don't doubt his heart is in the right place, he probably is a bit too emotionally involved if you want to think of him purely being head of the business. No doubt Ashton dazzled him and as I said he must have trusted him almost without question. Yes obviously SL is based in the CI's, but come on zoom etc was available, he wasn't able to escape scrutiny, or he shouldn't have been.

I doubt if Steve was very happy he had been just about conned, that must have hurt quite a bit

[Davefevs]

2 minutes ago, RedM said:

I don't doubt his heart is in the right place, he probably is a bit too emotionally involved if you want to think of him purely being head of the business. No doubt Ashton dazzled him and as I said he must have trusted him almost without question. Yes obviously SL is based in the CI's, but come on zoom etc was available, he wasn't able to escape scrutiny, or he shouldn't have been.

I doubt if Steve was very happy he had been just about conned, that must have hurt quite a bit

Couldn’t agree more.  Guess a bit of a difference between zoom and the whites of his eyes.  But, yep, conned basically.