Lansdown - decision time

[ExiledAjax]

Just now, exAtyeoMax said:

yes but their stable owner might be better…

This is true, and is arguably proven.

I guess the question I need to ask myself is: do I think that we are more likely to be promoted by 2033/4 with a) Lansdown or b) a new owner.

If I'm honest, it's probably "b".

Personally though, I'd like to see an investor come in. Someone who takes 26% of the club and appoints a director or two, freshens things up, brings some drive, brings some challenge to Steve and Jon. I'd hope that with that mix, we might succeed.

[exAtyeoMax]

16 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

This is true, and is arguably proven.

I guess the question I need to ask myself is: do I think that we are more likely to be promoted by 2033/4 with a) Lansdown or b) a new owner.

If I'm honest, it's probably "b".

Personally though, I'd like to see an investor come in. Someone who takes 26% of the club and appoints a director or two, freshens things up, brings some drive, brings some challenge to Steve and Jon. I'd hope that with that mix, we might succeed.

I don't know. I'm a bit sceptical of any investor having/being permitted the drive to succeed by SL and co

[Riaz]

52 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Probably the muppets in charge.

See Kids response though.

After his initial targets were undermined by Pelling.

Undermined for good reason. A reason i wont go into on here.

[Davefevs]

2 minutes ago, Riaz said:

Undermined for good reason. A reason i wont go into on here.

Such a good reason, that Pelling left!

[Riaz]

1 minute ago, Davefevs said:

Such a good reason, that Pelling left!

Lansdown got involved in some of the deals - thats all i'm saying on here.

[Davefevs]

Just now, Riaz said:

Lansdown got involved in some of the deals - thats all i'm saying on here.

I’m sure he did…and probably made Pelling the scapegoat!

[Bristol Oil Services]

27 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

This is true, and is arguably proven.

I guess the question I need to ask myself is: do I think that we are more likely to be promoted by 2033/4 with a) Lansdown or b) a new owner.

If I'm honest, it's probably "b".

Personally though, I'd like to see an investor come in. Someone who takes 26% of the club and appoints a director or two, freshens things up, brings some drive, brings some challenge to Steve and Jon. I'd hope that with that mix, we might succeed.

You favour a fudge?

[fisherrich]

22 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

This is true, and is arguably proven.

I guess the question I need to ask myself is: do I think that we are more likely to be promoted by 2033/4 with a) Lansdown or b) a new owner.

If I'm honest, it's probably "b".

Personally though, I'd like to see an investor come in. Someone who takes 26% of the club and appoints a director or two, freshens things up, brings some drive, brings some challenge to Steve and Jon. I'd hope that with that mix, we might succeed.

Agree, but Lansdown won’t allow that to happen - he wants 100% control. Maybe it is time to say “Thanks Steve, but maybe time to progress/next step” rather than stagnate.
Get the impression Lansdown is open to offers as he intimated in an interview a while ago. He has to make Bristol Sport sellable I suppose?

[Riaz]

5 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I’m sure he did…and probably made Pelling the scapegoat!

Theres a reason Cotts didnt get as much time as other managers. Other than the team being woeful in the championship.

[ExiledAjax]

2 minutes ago, Bristol Oil Services said:

You favour a fudge?

You can call it a fudge, you can call it a compromise, you can calm it a commercial deal beneficial to all parties.

Ultimately I agree with @fisherrich though, I can favour whatever I like, but I suspect that Lansdown won't take more then 24% investment as he doesn't want to relinquish a controlling stake.

[Fordy62]

4 minutes ago, Riaz said:

Theres a reason Cotts didnt get as much time as other managers. Other than the team being woeful in the championship.

Cotts got as much time as most of our managers. There’s only one outlier here… but you conveniently make stuff up (Tomlin signing and Kodjia sale timing) to suit your argument and you’re not able to see things objectively (wage bill). 

So please excuse me when I call bollocks. 

[Riaz]

7 minutes ago, Fordy62 said:

Cotts got as much time as most of our managers. There’s only one outlier here… but you conveniently make stuff up (Tomlin signing and Kodjia sale timing) to suit your argument and you’re not able to see things objectively (wage bill). 

So please excuse me when I call bollocks. 

I didnt expect you to believe me, so i wont lose any sleep

[Bristol Oil Services]

3 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Don't think the Preston game was that bad. Was a bit underwhelming sure.

We spent 40 minutes of the second half of a home game on the back foot, clinging on, our goal living a bit of a charmed life, against dour/solid midtable opposition.  The "portents" were not encouraging. The entertainment was poor. The crowd was funereal, until a few boos at the end. 

The first half was bottom half L1 in terms of quality, from both sides. Some people want to see a bit of "action."

[Bristol Oil Services]

32 minutes ago, Riaz said:

Lansdown got involved in some of the deals - thats all i'm saying on here.

Where might you say a little  bit more?

[Riaz]

Just now, Bristol Oil Services said:

Where might you say a little  bit more?

In person!

[mozo]

3 hours ago, ExiledAjax said:

@Spike We're good for the next couple of years without selling anyone, but would then in say 2025/26 need to sell someone for £20m(ish). There's absolutely no guarantee of being able to do that.

@Mr Popodopolous 

This is precisely our business model: create a pathway in order to convert academy talent into assets, and to recruit young talent in order to increase their value.

I think future sales are very much at the heart of our philosophy, and I'd be confident that within our squad (with Murphy and TGH added), there are assets that will mature in value (not all, but enough).

The bit I worry that we're missing, is enough players that are good enough for a top 6 push in the here and now, but that worry could be for nothing if we kick on this season. 

 

Edited August 22, 2023 by mozo

[Alessandro]

20 hours ago, mozo said:

As much as I'm the first to criticise Mr L if I think he deserves it, I'm not sure that Lansdown Out chants are quite justified.

Being mid table in the Championship with all the debt that Lansdown has written off and the incredibly improved facilities, is hardly deserving of protest. 

I'm not saying he's amazing, and I'm very frustrated with him at times, but he's overseen enough good stuff to let him off the hook a bit.

There is a certain irony in this thread of the mixture of being angry with SL for 'not going for it' whilst also being angry with SL for 'going for it' previously.

I think it's very easy to focus on the negatives at the moment, the reality is the cutting of cloth has been just that, a natural progression seen in the cycles of football clubs time and again - we've not got relegated, we've not defaulted on wages, we've not missed HMRC tax bills.....but reading some posts that's the sentiment.

You can criticise SL for taking far too long to put certain structures in place at the club (finally done) or for some poor appointments.

It's looking potentially now the LJ/MA project was his last big push for promotion, it didn't work - we've debated the whys and whats/could've/should've for years.

But yet, here we are, still in the championship, still competing. My question is where next Mr Lansdown and the next few weeks will shed light when we read between the lines.

One of my biggest criticisms of SL is a simple one: coming out every year with the 'expectation of promotion' chat. I can forgive most mistakes, this league is ruthless and ultimately you've got to make tough calls but setting those expectations every year when you've not got the plan or the investment isn't realistically competitive enough and you are simply relying on beating the odds - it's just crazy. It alienates the fans and shows your lack of understanding. 

Edited August 22, 2023 by Alessandro

[Mr Chappers]

Think I’ll take stability with SL ahead of an unknown owner, spending big and crashing even bigger. We’ve only just recovered from the last mad spending spree, and look to be on the right track with the Academy. Rather be stable in the Championship than broke with the Gas

[chinapig]

10 minutes ago, Mr Chappers said:

Think I’ll take stability with SL ahead of an unknown owner, spending big and crashing even bigger. We’ve only just recovered from the last mad spending spree, and look to be on the right track with the Academy. Rather be stable in the Championship than broke with the Gas

But that spending spree was down to SL so I don't see the difference.

[fisherrich]

54 minutes ago, Alessandro said:

There is a certain irony in this thread of the mixture of being angry with SL for 'not going for it' whilst also being angry with SL for 'going for it' previously.

I think it's very easy to focus on the negatives at the moment, the reality is the cutting of cloth has been just that, a natural progression seen in the cycles of football clubs time and again - we've not got relegated, we've not defaulted on wages, we've not missed HMRC tax bills.....but reading some posts that's the sentiment.

You can criticise SL for taking far too long to put certain structures in place at the club (finally done) or for some poor appointments.

It's looking potentially now the LJ/MA project was his last big push for promotion, it didn't work - we've debated the whys and whats/could've/should've for years.

But yet, here we are, still in the championship, still competing. My question is where next Mr Lansdown and the next few weeks will shed light when we read between the lines.

One of my biggest criticisms of SL is a simple one: coming out every year with the 'expectation of promotion' chat. I can forgive most mistakes, this league is ruthless and ultimately you've got to make tough calls but setting those expectations every year when you've not got the plan or the investment isn't realistically competitive enough and you are simply relying on beating the odds - it's just crazy. It alienates the fans and shows your lack of understanding. 

Agree, and hereby is one of Lansdowns faults, he does not do Press/Media well. Mixed messages/over expectations - and then he alienates most of us. 
Been found out too many times. With all his millions, get a decent PR guy.

[Sleepy1968]

4 hours ago, ExiledAjax said:

Personally though, I'd like to see an investor come in. Someone who takes 26% of the club and appoints a director or two, freshens things up, brings some drive, brings some challenge to Steve and Jon. I'd hope that with that mix, we might succeed.

Is anyone daft enough to 'invest' a minority stake in a football club that loses £20m a year? Debatable. They would have zero influence on how the club was run, and I don't think even I would go for that.

But if Jon let them design the kits .... yeah, bugger it  let's do this.

 

[cheese]

4 hours ago, exAtyeoMax said:

yes but their stable owner might be better…

Perhaps we're backing the wrong horse.

[ExiledAjax]

39 minutes ago, Sleepy1968 said:

Is anyone daft enough to 'invest' a minority stake in a football club that loses £20m a year? Debatable. They would have zero influence on how the club was run, and I don't think even I would go for that.

But if Jon let them design the kits .... yeah, bugger it  let's do this.

 

You see people take minority stakes yes, Tom Brady just took a minority stake in Birmingham. Silver Lake recently took 10% of Man City, Newcastle are owned 80% by PIF (Saudi) and then there are two 10% minority owners. Most of the big private equity takeovers, including Chelsea, in recent years involve one lead investor plus a number of direct or indirect minority stakeholders. It's quite normal in modern football ownership.

You're correct that a minority owner won't automatically have any control over the club under the simple provisions of English company law.

However, in negotiations it is very possible, and in fact is normal in the world of private equity, for minority shareholders to be given special privileges such as the right to appoint a director (or more than one), or a veto power on certain matters, or extra votes on their shares, and almost always a preference on dividends, distributions, and receipt of assets on a winding up. In this way they gain some control, and they gain preferential treatment in the event of a sale/exit.

So no, if Lansdown brought a private equity type investor on board, they'd be unlikely to be powerless. 

I suspect that's where the blockage is. Lansdown doesn't want to give out these quite customary privileges that private equity, especially US private equity, investors are accustomed to receiving. That means he's closing doors and limiting his options to people who will take what he's offering. This last paragraph is conjecture based on the things we know - he's been looking for investment, especially in the US, and is yet to find a suitable party despite multiple US investments being made into PL and EFL clubs in the past few years.

Edited August 22, 2023 by ExiledAjax

[RUSSEL85]

1 hour ago, Mr Chappers said:

Think I’ll take stability with SL ahead of an unknown owner, spending big and crashing even bigger. We’ve only just recovered from the last mad spending spree, and look to be on the right track with the Academy. Rather be stable in the Championship than broke with the Gas

My opinion is that I would take that gamble now of a new owner. I don’t believe we will ever go up with SL at the helm, grateful for everything sincerely but think we need a new direction. 

Edited August 22, 2023 by RUSSEL85

[Merrick's Marvels]

10 minutes ago, RUSSEL85 said:

My opinion is that I would take that gamble now of a new owner. I don’t believe we will never go up with SL at the helm, grateful for everything sincerely but think we need a new direction. 

You might want to quickly edit that mate 

[Kid in the Riot]

2 hours ago, Mr Chappers said:

Think I’ll take stability with SL ahead of an unknown owner, spending big and crashing even bigger.

Stability? SL himself has effectively put the club up for sale. Two years ago. Two years of waiting for an investment/buyer. How is that stability?

By effectively putting the club up for sale, SL is saying either he is unable, or unwilling, to take the club forward.

So, there is currently no stability, nor is there an option of it going forward under SL. 

Edited August 22, 2023 by Kid in the Riot

[Barrs Court Red]

1 minute ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Stability? SL himself has effectively put the club up for sale. Two years ago. Two years of waiting for an investment/buyer. How is that stability?

By effectively putting the club up for sale, SL is saying either he is unable, or unwilling, to take the club forward.

So, there is currently no stability, nor is there an option of it going forward. 

I’ve been saying this for a while.  It hardly helps building a solid platform, when the foundations supporting it are going to be swapped out. 

[Alessandro]

10 minutes ago, Barrs Court Red said:

I’ve been saying this for a while.  It hardly helps building a solid platform, when the foundations supporting it are going to be swapped out. 

I don't agree with this - there is a huge amount that has been put in place that will stand us in good stead moving forwards for years. 

The academy, pathway, the ground, the HPC, transfer policy, balancing of the books to put us on a more sustainable financial footing.

If the foundations are going to be swapped out, we're doing exactly what we should be doing frankly - bloating the squad, wage bill and pushing FFP and giving the manager a 4 year deal now would make it even harder for a new owner coming in.  

Edited August 22, 2023 by Alessandro

[Bristol Rob]

15 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Stability? SL himself has effectively put the club up for sale. Two years ago. Two years of waiting for an investment/buyer. How is that stability?

By effectively putting the club up for sale, SL is saying either he is unable, or unwilling, to take the club forward.

So, there is currently no stability, nor is there an option of it going forward under SL. 

There is stability as long as SL is willing to underwrite the losses, what we will see, is limited investment.

I can see him spend to maintain, and if promotion occurs, CASH-BACK!

Not based on anything in particular, but I do have this feeling that as an individual, SL is reasonably content owning Bristol Sport, the problem is that the family desire* isn't there.

*And by desire, I mean that gifted-opportunity Boy who has a habit of touching things that go sour isn't the hands he wants to leave the club in. 

Edited August 22, 2023 by Bristol Rob

[Barrs Court Red]

1 minute ago, Alessandro said:

I don't agree with this - there is a huge amount that has been put in place that will stand us in good stead moving forwards for years. 

The academy, pathway, the ground, the HPC, transfer policy, balancing of the books to put us on a more sustainable financial footing.

If the foundations are going to be swapped out, we're doing exactly what we should be doing frankly - bloating the squad, wage bill and pushing FFP now would make it even harder for a new owner coming in.  

You mention bloat, which funnily enough probably why SL can’t shift the club - it’s lumbered by the whole set. on what’s been put in, yeah I’d agree- it’s all long overdue after wasting years flip flopping about, but the youth system especially is looking extremely promising now. 
 

You’re right in saying that in terms of the playing budget, it wouldn’t be advantageous to be lean about now - but how long is that feasible for? We’re two years in and the “offering” is getting steadily worse. 
 

At what point does it go from prudent to scorched Earth??