Lansdown - decision time

[Mr Popodopolous]

It's a shame as we are or could be with a bit of sensible backing now building something.

If NP does go come the summer, there should be a solid base but the next guy should there be one, will need to be very good.

[cidered abroad]

4 hours ago, Nogbad the Bad said:

Did SL watch games or even have any interest in BCFC in that period?

 

I believe the answer to that is a resounding NO.

[BLRed]

Don’t care as to the reaction but what really needs to happen is for the Lansdown to sell up and bugger off and let proper football owners help us progress further. They are definitely holding us back imo. Don’t care for the sentiment of he always saves us financially, that’s his job as an owner. The fact he has to do that all the time shows he’s not a very good football club owner. How many clubs have passed us whilst we continue to tread water? Get them gone and then we can move forward

[Fuber]

5 hours ago, GrahamC said:

Think we are at a very interesting point.

Saturday’s squad was missing Conway, Weimann, Atkinson & McCrorie, which is probably only about one above average in terms of absences yet of our 9 subs 5 have never started a Championship game & 3 haven’t featured in one at all. Another of the subs was Andy King, who we know is near to the end of his playing days & only there to provide experience & avoid it resembling an U21 team bench.

SL said that if Pearson sold players he could expect funds, but the disparity between sales (& in addition to this moving the likes of Wilson & Low off the wage bill) & our incomings is stark.

Whatever the Bolton lad who opted to stay ever does in the game the fact he was our initial target tells a lot about what type of player Pearson is now being expected to work with.

I am very grateful for his investment in the infrastructure & cash flow but a sale to another owner cannot come quickly enough.

Bit in bold is the key. Backed LJ to the hilt as he was a friend. But can't trust the consummate professional in NP as he doesn't get along with him. At least that's my take.

LJ got 75% retention of sales fund as spending budget - in spite of over £30m in wages annually. In a completely non-sustainable stratagem as proven by COVID.

Nige has spent at most £6m while bringing in over £34m. Effectively 20%.reducing the wage bill by almost 30% - the only seasons LJ had a wage budget similar or less were his first two; Nige finished 5 points better off with a younger and smaller squad in 14th compared to LJs 17th, the latter also had Tammy bailing him out.

Secondly, cant get the Luton comparison interview out of my head.

100% need new ownership. For all the money he's put in - SLs decision making (outside of appointing Dawe chairman) has been a sh*t show.

Edited August 21, 2023 by Fuber

[Davefevs]

3 hours ago, CrackingCheeseGromit said:

Strange how views can change in just a few weeks. Back at the beginning of August we were saying that the players we had bought were quality acquisitions,  and how we had cover for every position. Play offs were seemingly a possiblity especially  with the soundbites coming from the club.

Here we are, three short games later panicking about shoehorning somebody into the left centre back slot, once again playing players out of position, and the spine of the side looking weaker than it has for years. 

I know.  I was buoyant.  I thought that the Semenyo money had predominantly covered Mehmeti and Cornick and the 4 summer signings, and if Alex did stay, I thought we had addressed some issues of depth, and were ready to kick on.

If Alex did go, we would use some funds to carry out recruiting to the plan.

Then I hear Nige say we are close to our wage budget.

I assume he’s being careful to not pay Scott-tax on new players or contracts for existing ones.  But the sense is that he’s not trying to be smart, but telling us “as it is”.

There is still a bit of time left in the window to quash my fears.

But if they aren’t, I think I will be incredibly disappointed.  I don’t think you raise money from player sales AND cut costs too, and then not be allowed some of it.  If the 4 summer signings were preempting Scott’s money, then SL is being incredibly tight.  And I don’t know why he would, unless we go with some of the thoughts expressed by others on this and other threads.

Talk about potential for knocking the wind out of your sails!!!

3 hours ago, Supersonic Robin said:

Another concern is how the Lansdowns define 'underachievement'.

I recall a couple of years ago we had a minor (but public) disagreement between Pearson and JL about how well the club should expect to be doing that season.

Now, as has been pointed out by others, SL appears to believe that Luton provide sufficient evidence that a manager can achieve promotion with little financial backing. 

The Lansdowns still seem completely unwilling or completely unable to acknowledge the mess that Pearson inherited, and the struggles he's faced as a result.

That Luton comment was crass and really showed that SL doesn’t understand football.

1 hour ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

@Riaz

Not just about the crowds now, our commercial revenue for a non Parachute, non PL recently is very good.

Was virtually recovered to full capacity our total BCFC Holdings revenue in 2021-22, not far away from 2018-19 levels.

I fully accept we can't compete with Parachute bolstered clubs in the main, I also accept the case for a bit more caution given the recent past but I can't accept claims that competing financially with Coventry and Middlesbrough is beyond us.

Could list a clutch of others. Again we have to be sensible but..

Unfortunately Mr P, the costs of creating every £1 of revenue is too high.  Nige has done his bit on the playing side costs (and some), what is the rest of the group doing.  At one point the playing costs were a big millstone, those have been sorted by and large, a good base to work forward from.  But the costs of the overall model are inefficient.

If I was an investor I wouldn’t want to touch the rest with a bargepole.  Football club, ground, that’s it.  Cancel support contracts for the rest, bring it in-house and control your own destiny.

[phantom]

1 minute ago, Fuber said:

LJ got 75% retention of sales fund as spending budget - in spite of over £30m in wages annually. In a completely non-sustainable stratagem as proven by COVID.

I do agree with your full post but worth recognising the above line in that this spending took years off the club progressing and we are only now just coming out the other side of it

[ScottishRed]

13 minutes ago, BLRed said:

Don’t care as to the reaction but what really needs to happen is for the Lansdown to sell up and bugger off and let proper football owners help us progress further. They are definitely holding us back imo. Don’t care for the sentiment of he always saves us financially, that’s his job as an owner. The fact he has to do that all the time shows he’s not a very good football club owner. How many clubs have passed us whilst we continue to tread water? Get them gone and then we can move forward

How is bailing us out his ‘job’? He could easily take a view, as most business owners would, to cut costs to the point where there is no need for a bailout. That said, I accept owning a football club is not the same as any other business.

Reading between the lines I think he is rapidly reaching the point of wanting out as soon as possible hence the recent  statement and also Nige not expecting to see much of the Scott money. I think the finance man in him is looking to make the club as attractive as possible to a potential owner (s). As many have said he has provided great infrastructure but his legacy will always be failing to get promotion.

It is impossible to tell but the only reason someone would be interested in buying us would be to get to the PL, which, as we all know is much easier said than done. 

I suspect we are in for another mediocre season with the high likelihood of Nige departing next summer. I still believe that if he was backed we would have a decent chance of top 6 but that isn’t going to happen.

[Lord Northski]

I read earlier in this chain that apparently we can’t compete financially with Coventry or Middlesbrough. I get that Middlesbrough get bigger gates, but Coventry don’t get vastly more. Given that supposedly FFP applies to them too Why is it that this is a generally held belief? Would appreciate anyone’s insight 

[Mr Popodopolous]

1 minute ago, Lord Northski said:

I read earlier in this chain that apparently we can’t compete financially with Coventry or Middlesbrough. I get that Middlesbrough get bigger gates, but Coventry don’t get vastly more. Given that supposedly FFP applies to them too Why is it that this is a generally held belief? Would appreciate anyone’s insight 

Seems we are choosing not to.

I would have to check their exact turnover etc but they've entrenched a bit too- Ramsey, Giles, Archer, Akpom all gone from last season, they may not do quite so well.

Coventry had a fairly low cost base for some years but lower revenue feeds into cost. They also have less Allowables. Again though we are well clear of FFP now so it can't be that.

[Mr Popodopolous]

15 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I know.  I was buoyant.  I thought that the Semenyo money had predominantly covered Mehmeti and Cornick and the 4 summer signings, and if Alex did stay, I thought we had addressed some issues of depth, and were ready to kick on.

If Alex did go, we would use some funds to carry out recruiting to the plan.

Then I hear Nige say we are close to our wage budget.

I assume he’s being careful to not pay Scott-tax on new players or contracts for existing ones.  But the sense is that he’s not trying to be smart, but telling us “as it is”.

There is still a bit of time left in the window to quash my fears.

But if they aren’t, I think I will be incredibly disappointed.  I don’t think you raise money from player sales AND cut costs too, and then not be allowed some of it.  If the 4 summer signings were preempting Scott’s money, then SL is being incredibly tight.  And I don’t know why he would, unless we go with some of the thoughts expressed by others on this and other threads.

Talk about potential for knocking the wind out of your sails!!!

That Luton comment was crass and really showed that SL doesn’t understand football.

Unfortunately Mr P, the costs of creating every £1 of revenue is too high.  Nige has done his bit on the playing side costs (and some), what is the rest of the group doing.  At one point the playing costs were a big millstone, those have been sorted by and large, a good base to work forward from.  But the costs of the overall model are inefficient.

If I was an investor I wouldn’t want to touch the rest with a bargepole.  Football club, ground, that’s it.  Cancel support contracts for the rest, bring it in-house and control your own destiny.

I mostly agree Dave but cost of staging events has risen drastically in recent years. In house definitely better I agree, that will help but I do wonder marginal gains beyond that just how much there might be.

If wages are the biggest expense of a Business then for AGL they were about 40 pct which maybe too high for an ordinary business but at the same time, a company like Ashton Gate Limited should not be running at a loss before tax- that's mad!!

[Redrascal2]

6 hours ago, glynriley said:

Said after the game on Saturday, after a comment about the pressure growing on NP, I think if we don't bring at least 2 in before the end of the window, the pressure starts to build on SL.

How will Lansdown feel any pressure. It has never bothered him in the past when pursuing an unpopular course of action with supporters and cannot see it now. Promotion isn't his remit it is to cut costs and find investment elsewhere and to hell with the state of our football team.

[Glen hump]

8 minutes ago, Redrascal2 said:

How will Lansdown feel any pressure. It has never bothered him in the past when pursuing an unpopular course of action with supporters and cannot see it now. Promotion isn't his remit it is to cut costs and find investment elsewhere and to hell with the state of our football team.

His club , he can do whatever he wants, didn’t he tell us that a while back 

[Finley_Smith10]

If we don’t invest this window then things will turn toxic very quick. Everyone knows we need a couple quality signings and abit of creativity 

[italian dave]

2 hours ago, One Team said:

Agreed, you can easily see a “back me or sack me” conversation happening, if not already. 

Was there a hint at that in his post match interview on RB on Saturday? When he made a point of saying that he backed his players. 

[Red white and red]

The only time Lansdown will back a manager is when they aren't ‘difficult’. It’s almost like he rewards them for not being demanding.
 

Lansdown ruined this club for years by giving his mate Johnson, and Johnson’s mate Ashton an obscene amount of money and control. This decision landed us in the brown stuff. A time when he lost focus to a worrying extent. Difficult to understand from such a savvy businessman.
 

From a basket case of a club, Pearson has rolled his sleeves up and got rid of a lot of litter. The wage bill has reduced, the playing staff are younger and hungrier and the style of play has slowly improved over his tenure.

Like everybody else, I am not in the know and have no ‘insight’ into the finances of the club. Surely, there is some money available for Pearson to improve this squad? Surely there are attainable targets out there? It would be very ‘Lansdown’ to not back Pearson financially as Pearson is his own man and knows what he wants. Why is it when Lansdown is seemingly ‘challenged’ slightly, he fails to amend his previous poor decision making and back the right man.

Lather, rinse, repeat. 

[Grey Fox]

41 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I know.  I was buoyant.  I thought that the Semenyo money had predominantly covered Mehmeti and Cornick and the 4 summer signings, and if Alex did stay, I thought we had addressed some issues of depth, and were ready to kick on.

If Alex did go, we would use some funds to carry out recruiting to the plan.

Then I hear Nige say we are close to our wage budget.

I assume he’s being careful to not pay Scott-tax on new players or contracts for existing ones.  But the sense is that he’s not trying to be smart, but telling us “as it is”.

There is still a bit of time left in the window to quash my fears.

But if they aren’t, I think I will be incredibly disappointed.  I don’t think you raise money from player sales AND cut costs too, and then not be allowed some of it.  If the 4 summer signings were preempting Scott’s money, then SL is being incredibly tight.  And I don’t know why he would, unless we go with some of the thoughts expressed by others on this and other threads.

Talk about potential for knocking the wind out of your sails!!!

That Luton comment was crass and really showed that SL doesn’t understand football.

Unfortunately Mr P, the costs of creating every £1 of revenue is too high.  Nige has done his bit on the playing side costs (and some), what is the rest of the group doing.  At one point the playing costs were a big millstone, those have been sorted by and large, a good base to work forward from.  But the costs of the overall model are inefficient.

If I was an investor I wouldn’t want to touch the rest with a bargepole.  Football club, ground, that’s it.  Cancel support contracts for the rest, bring it in-house and control your own destiny.

So , you can now see what I’ve been banging on about? 

[Glen hump]

1 minute ago, Red white and red said:

The only time Lansdown will back a manager is when they aren't ‘difficult’. It’s almost like he rewards them for not being demanding.
 

Lansdown ruined this club for years by giving his mate Johnson, and Johnson’s mate Ashton an obscene amount of money and control. This decision landed us in the brown stuff. A time when he lost focus to a worrying extent. Difficult to understand from such a savvy businessman.
 

From a basket case of a club, Pearson has rolled his sleeves up and got rid of a lot of litter. The wage bill has reduced, the playing staff are younger and hungrier and the style of play has slowly improved over his tenure.

Like everybody else, I am not in the know and have no ‘insight’ into the finances of the club. Surely, there is some money available for Pearson to improve this squad? Surely there are attainable targets out there? It would be very ‘Lansdown’ to not back Pearson financially as Pearson is his own man and knows what he wants. Why is it when Lansdown is seemingly ‘challenged’ slightly, he fails to amend his previous poor decision making and back the right man.

Lather, rinse, repeat. 

People like sl don’t like being told the truth , I’ve got a feeling Nigel has told him a few things sl doesn’t like, think Nigel will walk sooner or later, wouldn’t surprise me if je got the job 

[Redrascal2]

5 minutes ago, Red white and red said:

The only time Lansdown will back a manager is when they aren't ‘difficult’. It’s almost like he rewards them for not being demanding.
 

Lansdown ruined this club for years by giving his mate Johnson, and Johnson’s mate Ashton an obscene amount of money and control. This decision landed us in the brown stuff. A time when he lost focus to a worrying extent. Difficult to understand from such a savvy businessman.
 

From a basket case of a club, Pearson has rolled his sleeves up and got rid of a lot of litter. The wage bill has reduced, the playing staff are younger and hungrier and the style of play has slowly improved over his tenure.

Like everybody else, I am not in the know and have no ‘insight’ into the finances of the club. Surely, there is some money available for Pearson to improve this squad? Surely there are attainable targets out there? It would be very ‘Lansdown’ to not back Pearson financially as Pearson is his own man and knows what he wants. Why is it when Lansdown is seemingly ‘challenged’ slightly, he fails to amend his previous poor decision making and back the right man.

Lather, rinse, repeat. 

If he had run his company like he ran Bristol City then he would be penniless.

[formerly known as ivan]

4 hours ago, Riaz said:

I think we need to accept we are one of the smaller clubs in the division and therefore, we cant sustain a wage bill to compete with most teams.

Most teams have been in the prem and gained all the resourses that comes with that (inclduing parachute) or they get much bigger crowds.

We got the money - but we dont want to commit to long term big wages,

Lucky for Luton they didn’t have the same mentality as you then…

[chinapig]

45 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

That Luton comment was crass and really showed that SL doesn’t understand football.

It's such flawed logic. The logical conclusion would be that the managers of every club should be sacked if they don't emulate Luton.

It also seems to have escaped his notice that Luton have been very well managed on and off the field for years. Not a claim he would be justified in making though he would doubtless make it anyway.

[Superjack]

15 minutes ago, Red white and red said:

The only time Lansdown will back a manager is when they aren't ‘difficult’. It’s almost like he rewards them for not being demanding.
 

Lansdown ruined this club for years by giving his mate Johnson, and Johnson’s mate Ashton an obscene amount of money and control. This decision landed us in the brown stuff. A time when he lost focus to a worrying extent. Difficult to understand from such a savvy businessman.
 

From a basket case of a club, Pearson has rolled his sleeves up and got rid of a lot of litter. The wage bill has reduced, the playing staff are younger and hungrier and the style of play has slowly improved over his tenure.

Like everybody else, I am not in the know and have no ‘insight’ into the finances of the club. Surely, there is some money available for Pearson to improve this squad? Surely there are attainable targets out there? It would be very ‘Lansdown’ to not back Pearson financially as Pearson is his own man and knows what he wants. Why is it when Lansdown is seemingly ‘challenged’ slightly, he fails to amend his previous poor decision making and back the right man.

Lather, rinse, repeat. 

Bang on. 

[Superjack]

11 minutes ago, Glen hump said:

People like sl don’t like being told the truth , I’ve got a feeling Nigel has told him a few things sl doesn’t like, think Nigel will walk sooner or later, wouldn’t surprise me if je got the job 

I fear sooner.

[Lakeside Red]

54 minutes ago, Fuber said:

Bit in bold is the key. Backed LJ to the hilt as he was a friend. But can't trust the consummate professional in NP as he doesn't get along with him. At least that's my take.

LJ got 75% retention of sales fund as spending budget - in spite of over £30m in wages annually. In a completely non-sustainable stratagem as proven by COVID.

Nige has spent at most £6m while bringing in over £34m. Effectively 20%.reducing the wage bill by almost 30% - the only seasons LJ had a wage budget similar or less were his first two; Nige finished 5 points better off with a younger and smaller squad in 14th compared to LJs 17th, the latter also had Tammy bailing him out.

Secondly, cant get the Luton comparison interview out of my head.

100% need new ownership. For all the money he's put in - SLs decision making (outside of appointing Dawe chairman) has been a sh*t show.

I can’t see us getting new owners anytime soon . Now we’re part of Bristol sport no one will want to invest in us they won’t  be interested in the rugby or basket ball that’s going to be the problem

[Guest]

4 hours ago, Riaz said:

I think we need to accept we are one of the smaller clubs in the division and therefore, we cant sustain a wage bill to compete with most teams.

Most teams have been in the prem and gained all the resourses that comes with that (inclduing parachute) or they get much bigger crowds.

We got the money - but we dont want to commit to long term big wages,

When you say we you mean SL, and he wont gamble with his money to get us there;

You say we dont want to commit to long term big wages, shortly after you say "all the resources that come with that" "including parachute payments" so wont the super resources cover any investments we made to get us there? or are we to stay just here where we were over 50yrs ago.

SL will certainly be looking to exit asap and offering a nice safe FC will be the carrot on offer, we have to bide our time, forget any hope of moving up a div until new hope arrives, till then we are treading water.

 

[Davefevs]

36 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I mostly agree Dave but cost of staging events has risen drastically in recent years. In house definitely better I agree, that will help but I do wonder marginal gains beyond that just how much there might be.

If wages are the biggest expense of a Business then for AGL they were about 40 pct which maybe too high for an ordinary business but at the same time, a company like Ashton Gate Limited should not be running at a loss before tax- that's mad!!

I’m really referring to the pre-Covid accounts…the cost of running BCFC is beset by costs of the other service providers that imho do us no favours.

I take your point re events though, a good point.

15 minutes ago, Red white and red said:

The only time Lansdown will back a manager is when they aren't ‘difficult’. It’s almost like he rewards them for not being demanding.
 

Lansdown ruined this club for years by giving his mate Johnson, and Johnson’s mate Ashton an obscene amount of money and control. This decision landed us in the brown stuff. A time when he lost focus to a worrying extent. Difficult to understand from such a savvy businessman.
 

From a basket case of a club, Pearson has rolled his sleeves up and got rid of a lot of litter. The wage bill has reduced, the playing staff are younger and hungrier and the style of play has slowly improved over his tenure.

Like everybody else, I am not in the know and have no ‘insight’ into the finances of the club. Surely, there is some money available for Pearson to improve this squad? Surely there are attainable targets out there? It would be very ‘Lansdown’ to not back Pearson financially as Pearson is his own man and knows what he wants. Why is it when Lansdown is seemingly ‘challenged’ slightly, he fails to amend his previous poor decision making and back the right man.

Lather, rinse, repeat. 

I kinda expected a £20-25m windfall, no matter how much of that was the first payment to have resulted in a budget adjustment.  The fee is banked, even if the cash isn’t, and generally Cashflow hadn’t ever been an issue before for SL.

14 minutes ago, Grey Fox said:

So , you can now see what I’ve been banging on about? 

I never couldn’t see.  You’ll see I agreed / liked a lot of the sentiments of your posts

What I and others have questioned is the reality of PL clubs coming calling.  There’s a player in the middle too.  That’s what we’ve been trying to get across.

[Grey Fox]

13 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I’m really referring to the pre-Covid accounts…the cost of running BCFC is beset by costs of the other service providers that imho do us no favours.

I take your point re events though, a good point.

I kinda expected a £20-25m windfall, no matter how much of that was the first payment to have resulted in a budget adjustment.  The fee is banked, even if the cash isn’t, and generally Cashflow hadn’t ever been an issue before for SL.

I never couldn’t see.  You’ll see I agreed / liked a lot of the sentiments of your posts

What I and others have questioned is the reality of PL clubs coming calling.  There’s a player in the middle too.  That’s what we’ve been trying to get across.

And my point was to sell when we are ready, in this case when we would have a midfield capable of competing, which it was Fermin obvious ( now to everyone) that , without Scott, we do not.

Over and out, I’m having a day off.

[Riaz]

35 minutes ago, formerly known as ivan said:

Lucky for Luton they didn’t have the same mentality as you then…

I’m not the one setting the wage budget, moreover, I’m pretty sure Luton had a smaller wage budget than us!

Totally confused by this response to be fair!

26 minutes ago, wtf said:

When you say we you mean SL, and he wont gamble with his money to get us there;

You say we dont want to commit to long term big wages, shortly after you say "all the resources that come with that" "including parachute payments" so wont the super resources cover any investments we made to get us there? or are we to stay just here where we were over 50yrs ago.

SL will certainly be looking to exit asap and offering a nice safe FC will be the carrot on offer, we have to bide our time, forget any hope of moving up a div until new hope arrives, till then we are treading water.

 

He’s overspent in the past and now he does not want to. And he’s open to investment from outside. Fair enough i say 

[Superjack]

2 hours ago, Rocky said:

SL was the one who initiated contact with NP in the first place.  I can't imagine there's anybody in football (or outside for that matter) that is not aware of NP's prickly exterior, even though he's supposed to be the opposite if you're on the inside!  So SL will be fully aware of who Nige is and the possibility of disagreements.  I think it's healthy for an employee to challenge people up the ladder, and those up the ladder should equally like a challenge (they are likely to have had huge challenges in business in order to be successful?!) 

I did wonder if NP fancies a move upstairs, he has bought a house in the area and seems to love it.  With all the talk of his bucket list etc, perhaps he would prefer a mentor/DOF type of role.

 

I hope that you are correct in your feeling. I have doubts.

I don't want to see NP move upstairs, because I would rather he stays where he is and is rewarded for the good work that he (and his staff) have done.

But if he has to relinquish the reins as manager, I would rather he stay with us. I think his qualities as a person (without wishing to allude to Ashton's 'human being' b*ll*cks) would be a massive loss to our club.

Frankly imo, he is the best person we have from top to bottom.

Edited August 21, 2023 by Superjack

[Bristol Rob]

1 hour ago, BLRed said:

Don’t care as to the reaction but what really needs to happen is for the Lansdown to sell up and bugger off and let proper football owners help us progress further. They are definitely holding us back imo. Don’t care for the sentiment of he always saves us financially, that’s his job as an owner. 

I have read this several times on here, the term 'proper football owners', but I'm not really sure I know what it means.

Can someone list half a dozen clubs who have proper football owners just so I can understand the term.

[Merrick's Marvels]

14 minutes ago, Grey Fox said:

And my point was to sell when we are ready, in this case when we would have a midfield capable of competing, which it was Fermin obvious ( now to everyone) that , without Scott, we do not.

Over and out, I’m having a day off.

Jesus H Christ. Are you thick?? On ignore you pop.