Where is our CEO...who is he?

[bpexile]

45 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Haha, I’m pretty balanced / positive side of balanced on the football stuff.  But this stuff is more black and white / black and red.  It stinks of having a clueless owner, who has taken for granted what a fantastic job Nige, Richard and Tins have done in getting this club on an even(ish) keel.

And when I say Nige, I include Fleming, Euell and Mountain.

And when I say Tins, I include all those Academy staff that have helped along the way - over a longer period than Nige.

They’ve bailed SL and JL out.

The lack of gratitude is disgusting.

Couldn't agree more, imo they've all done a remarkable job & are not being recognised for it from either of the L's.

Why don't we set up a crowd funding thingy & buy the club Dave ? 

ooops it's medication time, please forget the last statement .

[W-S-M Seagull]

21 minutes ago, GrahamC said:

Think he also said Luton (our owner’s new favourite comparison) had a “small squad” last season.

Utter bollocks, in 22/23 they used 30 players, it might have been a cheap one in terms of wages but it was about 8 players bigger.

It's also true that the season before last they increased their wage budget by 25%ish and without doubt increased it further last season.

People often talk about how well Luton and Coventry did last season and that we should try to emulate that but they fail to mention that they both did well whilst increasing their budgets significantly at a time where many clubs were reducing theirs. 

We continue to reduce our wage budget so how can we emulate them? 

Edited September 4, 2023 by W-S-M Seagull

[beaverface]

3 hours ago, And Its Smith said:

SL is probably insecure. I thought that when he named a stand after himself!

I'm still waiting to hear what the club have planned with ref. To Terry Cooper!

[Ian M]

I am still digesting tonight's interview and a few things don't add up for me:

• Earlier in the summer, Brian Tinnion stated that there was a Plan A for recruitment if Alex stayed and a Plan B for recruitment if Alex was sold.
• Meanwhile, Pearson, said in answer to the press that the signing of Jason Knight was to play with Alex and not in place of him.
• However, Alex Scott was sold to Bournemouth in August for £25m.
• Following that sale, when the press asked Pearson for comment, he seemed genuinely annoyed/upset by the decision and said “it was the club that sold him” insinuating he was not pleased, almost sulky at the time.
• Since that sale, Bristol City signed just one player on loan, a midfielder capable of covering at full-back due to a long-term injury to Ross McCrorie.
• We have also since learned that the wage budget was set in March of this year, several months ahead of selling Alex and that we have maxed that and cannot sign anyone else.
• Tonight on Radio Bristol, Phil Alexander, the club’s CEO, revealed that the club was always working towards that budget set in March and that we had bought early to pre-spend the money that selling Alex would bring in. He also stated that TGH was not planned for and was a response to injuries.

Based on these facts, it is difficult to determine whether Tinnion and Pearson were complicit in misleading fans or whether they were misled themselves. However, it is clear that there is a discrepancy between what was said earlier in the summer and what has been revealed tonight. It is up to fans to decide what they believe based on these facts.

[Atticus]

Yeah some of this ain't sitting right with me. 

It's crystal clear that NP is being kept in the dark regarding the future of our players and potentially being lied too.

It's evident Lansdown was looking to sell Scott this summer whereby Pearson believed our preference was to keep him if we could. 

To come out and say these summer signings were on the assumption we sold Scott, and Pearsons comments that we signed Knight not as a replacement. And he wanted them playing together, plus his obvious disappointment when we sold him. 

It's just contradictory. 

This is all concerning. 

Is Lansdown actually actively looking to sell the club? If ever there was evidence of somebody taking us as far as they can, this is clearly it. 

Edited September 4, 2023 by Atticus

[cidercity1987]

11 minutes ago, Ian M said:

I am still digesting tonight's interview and a few things don't add up for me:

• Earlier in the summer, Brian Tinnion stated that there was a Plan A for recruitment if Alex stayed and a Plan B for recruitment if Alex was sold.
• Meanwhile, Pearson, said in answer to the press that the signing of Jason Knight was to play with Alex and not in place of him.
• However, Alex Scott was sold to Bournemouth in August for £25m.
• Following that sale, when the press asked Pearson for comment, he seemed genuinely annoyed/upset by the decision and said “it was the club that sold him” insinuating he was not pleased, almost sulky at the time.
• Since that sale, Bristol City signed just one player on loan, a midfielder capable of covering at full-back due to a long-term injury to Ross McCrorie.
• We have also since learned that the wage budget was set in March of this year, several months ahead of selling Alex and that we have maxed that and cannot sign anyone else.
• Tonight on Radio Bristol, Phil Alexander, the club’s CEO, revealed that the club was always working towards that budget set in March and that we had bought early to pre-spend the money that selling Alex would bring in. He also stated that TGH was not planned for and was a response to injuries.

Based on these facts, it is difficult to determine whether Tinnion and Pearson were complicit in misleading fans or whether they were misled themselves. However, it is clear that there is a discrepancy between what was said earlier in the summer and what has been revealed tonight. It is up to fans to decide what they believe based on these facts.

There is as much chance of Pearson lying about this as there was him lying about Scott being injured v Preston. I.e none.

He has absolutely been led down the garden path same as the rest of us. I feel so sorry for him that all the hard work of the last 2.5 years to clear up Lansdowns mess is for nothing for the sake of 2/3 players our squad needs to challenge

[Cardy]

4 hours ago, RedRoss said:

Basically we're gonna be operating very differently going forward. SL won't be topping us up anymore.

Then there’s no point him being the owner anymore more then. Time for a change at the top & a new Chairman with some ambition.

[Ian M]

2 minutes ago, Cardy said:

Then there’s no point him being the owner anymore more then. Time for a change at the top & a new Chairman with some ambition.

Quite. Whilst it’s admirable, the rest of the Championship will be spending what they are allowed and when we don’t renew the contract of our manager who has proven himself able to manage on a shoe string we will likely fall down the table. We’ll probably then chuck money at trying to stay up but recruiting into a club with a losing mentality often goes well doesn’t it?

[mozo]

1 hour ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

I think what most of us are confused by, is that why all of a sudden has SL decided to stop putting in so much money? 

In the past he has thrown a lot of money after bad. 

Yet here we are now with probably our best chance of taking a step forward and he decides to cut his funding. It's bizarre.

If next August we're watching the first game under a new ownership, I guess we'll look back and say, so that's why Lansdown went weird. But if in two or three seasons nothing has changed the frustration will just build and build.

[chinapig]

26 minutes ago, Atticus said:

It's just contradictory. 

The messaging is consistently contradictory. How do we square what Alexander had to say with Steve's previous statement that what football earns football can spend for instance?

At best they are confused as to what the hell the strategy is, at worst somebody is lying.

Unfortunately unless Twentyman gets a job with a Guernsey radio station nobody is going to challenge Steve.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Tbh the football earns vs football spend statement, yes that was said but the whole statement was more varied, possibly was confused too.

"What football earns football can spend".

Not quite.

"What football makes, football can spend. But it's got to make it and obviously going back to Covid, football couldn't make anything.

"There isn't a debt to be paid but we need to get the balance between the income and expenditure, all businesses need to do that".

Not a fan of starting a sentence with "but"  however basically cash breakeven it sounds like and the reference to Covid is interesting.

Perhaps the gap between how much he wanted to put in ideally and how much he had to, is playing out with a more balanced Cash Flow budget.

Dunno if people recall but as a club we were quite bullish about reopening during Covid especially around August, September time. Possibly quite vocal.

Edited September 4, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

To put it another way, though the Profit and Loss will show a £25m Profit on Disposal on paper.

In practice the cash flow is key...instslennrs inbound from Scott, Semenyo, the usual revenue, non xash items etc. You substantially reduce SL finding and although the FFP position is now comfortably clear, that is where the budgetary crunch comes.

Next hear TV revenue up by £5m is it. That should all in theory go back into the football budget.

[Harry]

14 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

"What football makes, football can spend. But it's got to make it and obviously going back to Covid, football couldn't make anything.

"There isn't a debt to be paid but we need to get the balance between the income and expenditure, all businesses need to do that."

Make of that what you will...

All businesses except most football clubs, who are mostly run at a debt where wealthy philanthropic owners massage their ego’s by throwing their millions into the club. 
Until they get bored and decide they don’t want to throw £13m a year down the drain any more. 
Steve Lansdown lives in a parallel universe of a football utopia, where football clubs only spend what they earn. 
Unless your recruitment, coaching and management is top top top notch, you’re gonna need to spend a lot of spondoolies to get out of this league. 

Edited September 4, 2023 by Harry

[W-S-M Seagull]

1 hour ago, Ian M said:

I am still digesting tonight's interview and a few things don't add up for me:

• Earlier in the summer, Brian Tinnion stated that there was a Plan A for recruitment if Alex stayed and a Plan B for recruitment if Alex was sold.
• Meanwhile, Pearson, said in answer to the press that the signing of Jason Knight was to play with Alex and not in place of him.
• However, Alex Scott was sold to Bournemouth in August for £25m.
• Following that sale, when the press asked Pearson for comment, he seemed genuinely annoyed/upset by the decision and said “it was the club that sold him” insinuating he was not pleased, almost sulky at the time.
• Since that sale, Bristol City signed just one player on loan, a midfielder capable of covering at full-back due to a long-term injury to Ross McCrorie.
• We have also since learned that the wage budget was set in March of this year, several months ahead of selling Alex and that we have maxed that and cannot sign anyone else.
• Tonight on Radio Bristol, Phil Alexander, the club’s CEO, revealed that the club was always working towards that budget set in March and that we had bought early to pre-spend the money that selling Alex would bring in. He also stated that TGH was not planned for and was a response to injuries.

Based on these facts, it is difficult to determine whether Tinnion and Pearson were complicit in misleading fans or whether they were misled themselves. However, it is clear that there is a discrepancy between what was said earlier in the summer and what has been revealed tonight. It is up to fans to decide what they believe based on these facts.

The two biggest questions I have from this is, I was under the impression that our business this summer was funded by the Semenyo money rather than us pre spending the Scott money. 

And the biggest and obvious one is that why wasn't a replacement for Scott brought in? 

[W-S-M Seagull]

7 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Next hear TV revenue up by £5m is it. That should all in theory go back into the football budget.

Phil tried to make a big deal of this. Whilst it's great we'll get an extra 5 million, so will 23 other Championship clubs so its kinda just neutral really isn't it?

[Mr Popodopolous]

3 minutes ago, Harry said:

All businesses except most football clubs, who are mostly run at a debt where wealthy philanthropic owners massage their ego’s by throwing their millions into the club. 
Until they get bored and decide they don’t want to throw £13m down the drain any more. 
Steve Lansdown lives in a parallel universe of a football utopia, where football clubs only spend what they earn. 
Unless your recruitment, coaching and management is top top top notch, you’re gonna need to spend a lot of spondoolies to get out of this league. 

I'd be interested to check a few clubs ie Huddersfield, Norwich, Rotherham, Watford, and maybe Sheffield Wednesday post sanctions for FFP cash flow wise and likewise Derby post administration etc but I do pretty much agree.

Philanthropic is one type, ego massaging, sport washing the range of motives is quite myriad. Then wrong uns such as Steve Dale at Bury.

He's tightened the tap at just the wrong time. Squad is thin. Injuries have already bitten a bit this season.

Would have been interesting to see how Nottingham Forest under Marinakis plays out if no play off win, likewise Fulham under Khan if they didn't yoyo back especially in 2020 and 2022 while still in receipt of Parachute Payments etc.

[Mr Popodopolous]

1 minute ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

Phil tried to make a big deal of this. Whilst it's great we'll get an extra 5 million, so will 23 other Championship clubs so its kinda just neutral really isn't it?

Agreed although some are already spending it by the sound of things already spending ahead of the curve budgeting for it!

I'm struggling to find positives with the current policy however.

[W-S-M Seagull]

1 minute ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Agreed although some are already spending it by the sound of things already spending ahead of the curve budgeting for it!

I'm struggling to find positives with the current policy however.

Don't worry. Phil will give another interview and say that we've pre spent that money on our summer signings no doubt. 

I was really optimistic about Phil coming in here but today he came across very much like a used cars sales man. 

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

It's also true that the season before last they increased their wage budget by 25%ish and without doubt increased it further last season.

People often talk about how well Luton and Coventry did last season and that we should try to emulate that but they fail to mention that they both did well whilst increasing their budgets significantly at a time where many clubs were reducing theirs. 

We continue to reduce our wage budget so how can we emulate them? 

Yep, I tweeted something the other day to a Watford “fanalyst” when he was getting stick for supporting Ismael, and the moaners were quoting Luton and Coventry…and that was “trajectory” is key.  As you and Graham point out they have been increasing their wage bills / spending, and although I have little sympathy for Watford (sorry @Markthehorn) due to Udinese stuff, they are finally trying to cut their cloth accordingly.  They sold Pedro for £30m in the summer, that’s recognition in my eyes.

1 hour ago, Ian M said:

I am still digesting tonight's interview and a few things don't add up for me:

• Earlier in the summer, Brian Tinnion stated that there was a Plan A for recruitment if Alex stayed and a Plan B for recruitment if Alex was sold.
• Meanwhile, Pearson, said in answer to the press that the signing of Jason Knight was to play with Alex and not in place of him.
• However, Alex Scott was sold to Bournemouth in August for £25m.
• Following that sale, when the press asked Pearson for comment, he seemed genuinely annoyed/upset by the decision and said “it was the club that sold him” insinuating he was not pleased, almost sulky at the time.
• Since that sale, Bristol City signed just one player on loan, a midfielder capable of covering at full-back due to a long-term injury to Ross McCrorie.
• We have also since learned that the wage budget was set in March of this year, several months ahead of selling Alex and that we have maxed that and cannot sign anyone else.
• Tonight on Radio Bristol, Phil Alexander, the club’s CEO, revealed that the club was always working towards that budget set in March and that we had bought early to pre-spend the money that selling Alex would bring in. He also stated that TGH was not planned for and was a response to injuries.

Based on these facts, it is difficult to determine whether Tinnion and Pearson were complicit in misleading fans or whether they were misled themselves. However, it is clear that there is a discrepancy between what was said earlier in the summer and what has been revealed tonight. It is up to fans to decide what they believe based on these facts.

It’s quite simple, the budget set in March with most of the “known known” playing out, was set too low.  If you set a budget based on several players leaving, e.g. Scott, Kalas, Massengo, Moore and Dasilva, where one of them is gonna also bring in £20-25m and you replace with players (I won’t  list them) that fit the wage structure and re-contract a few others…and you’re maxed out…you’ve set it too low.

I totally get the process PA explained, including how Cashflow is important when fees received (but also paid) are in instalments, but SL has set the budget too low, unjustifiably so based on his expectation levels.

I think Nige and Tins have done well to recruit who they have for such little money.

22/23’s accounts are likely to paint a picture of unnecessary austerity, other than SL’s latest thinking of doing “a Luton”.  Perhaps he should’ve consulted Mick Harford, Gary Sweet and Phil Chapple before making rash statements.

 

[Harry]

3 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

Don't worry. Phil will give another interview and say that we've pre spent that money on our summer signings no doubt. 

I was really optimistic about Phil coming in here but today he came across very much like a used cars sales man. 

Don’t blame the messenger. It’s quite clear who’s calling the shots and who are the fall guys. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

22/23- accounts I dunno £12-13m was my pre tax loss even with the Semenyo sale and FFP restarting again post Covid there was a big uncertainty about whether the League would pursue clubs or not...Gould said last August we along with all clubs were still awaiting definitive guidance.

Had we kept Semenyo beyond laat season I think the League would have taken a dim view.

23/24 ones however absolutely unnecessary austerity if we can look ahead to late 2024, early 2025.

Edited September 4, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[Cardy]

Some really interesting points about SL on this thread. Like a previous poster I am now wondering whether his health is deteriorating at all & whether this has prompted an updated financial strategy. It’s either that or a sale is imminent like others have suggested. Too many things just don’t add up with his recent behaviours & those of his son.

The other thing that I am going to raise is that as time has passed over the last 25 years it has become more and more apparent that SL makes bad decisions - lots of them. To the point that his strike rate for a good major decision is about 20%. The way that our operational strategy has supposedly followed the latest small / medium sized club to go past us as they reach the Prem is literally a Primary School method of copying.
I am therefore beginning to wonder if SL’s intellect is actually at a level that you would probably expect for a successful ‘self made’ Billionaire. It would be interesting to consider how successful in business SL would have been if his best mate in his college years hadn’t been Peter Hargreaves.
My understanding is Hargreaves was the true entrepreneur of the two who headed their risk management & decision making. I believe SL was the more risk adverse accountant type who kept the business solvent & legal during the rocky early years when their equal partnership was initially formed. 

Maybe the above is an unfair assessment of our owner however it has got to the point now where after so many years of continued mediocrity & ultimately failure against the ultimate ambition that you begin to look at the one common denominator in all that time.
SL is without doubt a very wealthy man however we will never really know how much of that wealth was actually down to him or the acumen of another individual. Maybe SL got incredibly lucky getting involved with Peter Hargreaves & that luck mysteriously ran out when they parted ways & he took on sole ownership of Bristol City FC….

Edited September 4, 2023 by Cardy

[Davefevs]

1 minute ago, Harry said:

Don’t blame the messenger. It’s quite clear who’s calling the shots and who are the fall guys. 

Beat me to it, Harr.

Thats kinda his job.

Whilst also trying to cover up / resolve the cluster#### his son has made over things like the kit / suppliers.

I’m not anti-Phil, in fact he provided me with all the clarity I needed tonight.  This is all on SL.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Club just needs fresh ideas, some cash too sure but fresh ideas really. 20-25 years is a long time and in particular at the helm of professional football.

Not as anti SL as some might be but his time here seeks to have run its course. He will bequeath a much updated stadium with notably enhanced revenue, a top notch training ground and a strong financial position produced he goes within the best year and a solid Championship side.

Infuriating that he cannot or will not see that we are 2-3 light now.

The other factor of course is that a new owner may not want NP. New owners have a tendency to dispense with the current manager either early or as soon as the ink is dry.

[chinapig]

33 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Tbh the football earns vs football spend statement, yes that was said but the whole statement was more varied, possibly was confused too.

"What football earns football can spend".

Not quite.

"What football makes, football can spend. But it's got to make it and obviously going back to Covid, football couldn't make anything.

It has made it to the tune of over £30m less money spent on recruitment.

"There isn't a debt to be paid but we need to get the balance between the income and expenditure, all businesses need to do that".

Nobody is suggesting we spend anything but a fraction of the funds raised so we can indeed get the balance right by still making a substantial net profit.

If he is literally saying income and expenditure have to match then we need to double down on austerity since his fantasy of raising £25m a year is, well, a fantasy.

It all still looks incoherent to me.

 

 

[Ashtongreight]

If this statement/exercise was supposed to put to bed recent unrest, it seems to have completely backfired. 
 

It’s obvious SL has changed tack, why not just come out and say it. 
 

To try to deny it, and expect us to buy into it, is kind of treating us like fools

[slartibartfast]

Haven't read whole thread, but did make me laugh when PA was talking about the board  "There's me SL,( some guy I can't remember) and ................er.. oh yes, of course Jon L, his son "  !Yes, I thought, that's how much input he has !

[Ian M]

SL seems to be saying he wants us to make £25m of sales each season (which is coincidentally what our current wage bill is estimated to be). If we don’t make those £25m sales do we need to reduce the wage budget further? We cut “numbers” by 2 this Summer, potential to go even smaller next season?

[Mr Popodopolous]

19 minutes ago, chinapig said:

 

Doesn't it depend on whether we are talking Cash Flow vs Profit and Loss account. SL does not make it at all clear in those comments.

If it is Cash Flow then instalment for Scott flows in, Massengo likewise and I dunno how the instalments are structured, wage bill down, past fees now mostly paid...you yet the idea suddenly cash break even is on the horizon.

If he wants us to break even in Profit and Loss terms then that is even less likely at this level. If that is what he means by Football earnings v expenditure them sadly a Profit on Disposal of Players of £5-10m, maybe £10-15m is required each season for the foreseeable.

It's for the birds, the Profit and Loss breakeven especially.

Rather incoherent and confused that statement back in late April, fully agree.

Edited September 5, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[Ashtongreight]

Just now, Ian M said:

SL seems to be saying he wants us to make £25m of sales each season (which is coincidentally what our current wage bill is estimated to be). If we don’t make those £25m sales do we need to reduce the wage budget further? We cut “numbers” by 2 this Summer, potential to go even smaller next season?

Is Nige still registered to play?, and Tinns for that matter…