Steve Lansdown interview

[Davefevs]

11 minutes ago, mozo said:

Cor, yeah all them fun stories you hear about the late 70s, I'll take another 1982! 

Delete….misread.

Edited August 28, 2023 by Davefevs

[Mr Popodopolous]

2 hours ago, Davefevs said:

So what do we want?  And what risks are we prepared to take?

This is the salient point.

What exactly do we want, what upside potential v downside risk are fans willing to accept.

Covid potential salvation won't occur again and neither will a get out of jail loophole as several have been shut!

[marmite]

1 hour ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

This is the salient point.

What exactly do we want, what upside potential v downside risk are fans willing to accept.

Covid potential salvation won't occur again and neither will a get out of jail loophole as several have been shut!

Well we certainly don't want the status quo , or Jon taking over ! Jon has zero interest it seems if his lack of communication with the fans is anything to go by. We've stagnated as a club and I feel maybe SL wants to get out now with the future infrastructure in place as his selling point. Can we trust SL to find the right buyer anymore than we trust him to find the right coach/manager? He's made a few errors there over the years. Bottom line is it's his club, as he's told us, and it will be his decision. I just hope he calls it right. I'm not aware who else there is to advise him. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

6 minutes ago, marmite said:

Well we certainly don't want the status quo , or Jon taking over ! Jon has zero interest it seems if his lack of communication with the fans is anything to go by. We've stagnated as a club and I feel maybe SL wants to get out now with the future infrastructure in place as his selling point. Can we trust SL to find the right buyer anymore than we trust him to find the right coach/manager? He's made a few errors there over the years. Bottom line is it's his club, as he's told us, and it will be his decision. I just hope he calls it right. I'm not aware who else there is to advise him. 

The buyer is always a lottery tbh. You don't just don't know, I'm sure the EFL and Derby thought Mel Morris would be a wise and sensible custodian in 2015...especially as he had invested in them previously and is from Derby or close to, Derbyshire absolutely.

I'm not saying this as an argument to just carry on just pointing out that with owners especially it can be difficult.

Definitely agree there is an element of stagnation or stasis currently.

Edited August 28, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

One bit in his interview that did strike a chord, forget finances.

He said you've always got to give fans hope. It is a little at odds with the current situation.

Edited August 28, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[Superjack]

3 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

One bit in his interview that did strike a chord, forget finances.

He said you've always got to give fans hope. It is a little at odds with the current situation.

There is one person at the club that is currently giving me hope 

And it isn't Steve Lansdown.

[The Journalist]

15 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Kinda my point too.  That bit of success probably wins over having a loony of an owner for Cardiff fans.

Many on here harp back to the First Division days and wanting to see it again…yet it came at a price, Fourth Division football and almost going bust.

So what do we want?  And what risks are we prepared to take?

Is boom and bust as bad as many suggest?

For me, being a football fan is all about moments and memories. What’s the point, otherwise?

I never really understand fans who are content with economic sustainability and bobbing along in the middle of a division being secure. I support a football team to escape the real-life worries of security and sustainability!

Let’s give it a crack. I’ve been a Bristol City fan for 25 years and at some point I’d like to see us on Match of the Day, to visit Old Trafford for a league game and waste £30m on some French striker who is supposed to score the goals to keep us up.

Life is too short. Way too short.

[Bangkok Red]

23 hours ago, The Journalist said:

I never really understand fans who are content with economic sustainability and bobbing along in the middle of a division being secure.

 

That's easy to say but you're not the one underwriting the debt

There's also a sensible element in the fan-base who haven't forgotten the lessons of 1982

 

[W-S-M Seagull]

23 hours ago, The Journalist said:

For me, being a football fan is all about moments and memories. What’s the point, otherwise?

I never really understand fans who are content with economic sustainability and bobbing along in the middle of a division being secure. I support a football team to escape the real-life worries of security and sustainability!

Let’s give it a crack. I’ve been a Bristol City fan for 25 years and at some point I’d like to see us on Match of the Day, to visit Old Trafford for a league game and waste £30m on some French striker who is supposed to score the goals to keep us up.

Life is too short. Way too short.

What I am content with is that every other Saturday I have a football team to go along and watch. In recent times its become even more enjoyable as the facilities have improved dramatically. 

I'd not want to risk all of that for the potential of one season on match of the day. 

For us, considering our history, mid table in the Championship for a prolonged period is a successful period for our club. 

We've taken that step from being a league one club to an established Championship club and now we need to take the next step, but it must be done responsibly and not in a way which risks what we currently have. 

[Bristol Oil Services]

4 hours ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

What I am content with is that every other Saturday I have a football team to go along and watch. In recent times its become even more enjoyable as the facilities have improved dramatically. 

I'd not want to risk all of that for the potential of one season on match of the day. 

For us, considering our history, mid table in the Championship for a prolonged period is a successful period for our club. 

We've taken that step from being a league one club to an established Championship club and now we need to take the next step, but it must be done responsibly and not in a way which risks what we currently have. 

How would our existence be put at risk? I cannot think of a football club in England with 25,000 seats, 20,000 crowds and 14,000 season ticket holders that went bust and disappeared. 

I can think of diddy little clubs in low catchment areas that disappeared, but not one in one of the biggest cities in the country.

If you are content with merely having football to watch at Ashton Gate every Saturday then that includes L1 or even L2? So why not risk a few years of that for the chance of doing something we have only managed twice in 120 years, and our friends in Horfield have never achieved?

Something thrilling and memorable, way beyond anything anyone has witnessed from Bristol City since the late 1970s. 

Another five seasons of 14th - 17th in the Championship struggling to score goals at home will only lead to more financial strife anyway, either way we go about it, money will be a problem. The only way I can see money not being a problem for us in the Championship is by being relegated down into it (just as long as we remember those relegation clauses!)

[cidered abroad]

On 28/08/2023 at 12:20, Davefevs said:

Kinda my point too.  That bit of success probably wins over having a loony of an owner for Cardiff fans.

Many on here harp back to the First Division days and wanting to see it again…yet it came at a price, Fourth Division football and almost going bust.

So what do we want?  And what risks are we prepared to take?

Is boom and bust as bad as many suggest?

Reference First Division before the 1982 fiasco.

We might still have been in that place if AD hadn't reacted so badly to the first player to take advantage of freedom of movement at end of contract. The one action that caused it was giving the first teamers contracts of eight to eleven years. No FFP and owners/Directors free to put as much money in as they wanted.

 

 

[The Journalist]

10 hours ago, Bangkok Red said:

That's easy to say but you're not the one underwriting the debt

There's also a sensible element in the fan-base who haven't forgotten the lessons of 1982

 

Yeah, I do appreciate that. I’ve always been supportive of Lansdown - although I’ve become less fond of many things he says - and I’m not demanding he go on a spending spree. It’s his money and he’s in charge.

But if you’re giving me the option of going for it or being conservative, I’m going for it every time. 

[ciderwithtommy]

It’s a funny situation / attitude to read at the moment. It feels like, as fans, we should be thankful for everything SL has done (and spent!) and there is a huge amount of logic to that. However, did I (or you) ever ask for the club to spend over 100% of its t/o? I certainly didn’t, so not sure I should feel so indebted for a decision I never wanted or would have made. 
 

If I was a person looking to sell a club, i would lower the wage bill and balance the books for sure, it’s the smart play…

[bcfc01]

14 minutes ago, ciderwithtommy said:

It’s a funny situation / attitude to read at the moment. It feels like, as fans, we should be thankful for everything SL has done (and spent!) and there is a huge amount of logic to that. However, did I (or you) ever ask for the club to spend over 100% of its t/o? I certainly didn’t, so not sure I should feel so indebted for a decision I never wanted or would have made. 
 

If I was a person looking to sell a club, i would lower the wage bill and balance the books for sure, it’s the smart play…

Agreed.

SL has pushed the boat out before and it seems a bit strange that he's now adopting such an austere stance when the club are not threatened by FFP and has around 35m to go into the accounts.

The only logical explanation is that there is serious interest in the club and he wants to make it as attractive as possible to outside investors. The other explanation is that he is gearing up to get rid of NP, but I don't really want to contemplate that scenario as it will cause some mayhem imo.

[Mr Popodopolous]

2 minutes ago, bcfc01 said:

Agreed.

SL has pushed the boat out before and it seems a bit strange that he's now adopting such an austere stance when the club are not threatened by FFP and has around 35m to go into the accounts.

The only logical explanation is that there is serious interest in the club and he wants to make it as attractive as possible to outside investors. The other explanation is that he is gearing up to get rid of NP, but I don't really want to contemplate that scenario as it will cause some mayhem imo.

That £35m will feed into likely losses of perhaps £22-23m and £18-20m however but yes by my best estimates we are probably £25m below the FFP limits.

By likely losses I mean losses before tax as if the transfers didn't occur.

[sh1t_ref_again]

43 minutes ago, ciderwithtommy said:

It’s a funny situation / attitude to read at the moment. It feels like, as fans, we should be thankful for everything SL has done (and spent!) and there is a huge amount of logic to that. However, did I (or you) ever ask for the club to spend over 100% of its t/o? I certainly didn’t, so not sure I should feel so indebted for a decision I never wanted or would have made. 
 

If I was a person looking to sell a club, i would lower the wage bill and balance the books for sure, it’s the smart play…

Fans were quiet happy, when getting excited about new signings under LJ / MA and the money being spent, that got us into the mess, very easy to say it was wrong now with hindsight, then again I can win the lottery every week with hindsight, so not that clever really!

Lucky we have SL who digs into his pockets and covers the spending / mistakes

[Fuber]

23 minutes ago, sh1t_ref_again said:

Fans were quiet happy, when getting excited about new signings under LJ / MA and the money being spent, that got us into the mess, very easy to say it was wrong now with hindsight, then again I can win the lottery every week with hindsight, so not that clever really!

Lucky we have SL who digs into his pockets and covers the spending / mistakes

Plenty of us were pointing out the overspending at the time - for example more than a couple questioned KP signing after DaSilva and Kalas and the point of it all - which was when LJ made the first quip of 'clubs in the bag' approach.

[ciderwithtommy]

26 minutes ago, sh1t_ref_again said:

Fans were quiet happy, when getting excited about new signings under LJ / MA and the money being spent, that got us into the mess, very easy to say it was wrong now with hindsight, then again I can win the lottery every week with hindsight, so not that clever really!

Lucky we have SL who digs into his pockets and covers the spending / mistakes

Spending at a rate that would cripple us never got me excited. Many city fans know how close we came to losing our club 40 years ago, so don’t throw us all under the bus. Wanting the club to be run well does not align with your metaphor of winning the lottery, although finding fit and proper owners probably does. 

Lucky we have a guy who covers his mistakes by digging in his pockets. Fixed that bit for you. As I said, this isn’t an attack on SL as such, but it’s his decisions that have led to him putting more money in. 

[sh1t_ref_again]

3 minutes ago, ciderwithtommy said:

Spending at a rate that would cripple us never got me excited. Many city fans know how close we came to losing our club 40 years ago, so don’t throw us all under the bus. Wanting the club to be run well does not align with your metaphor of winning the lottery, although finding fit and proper owners probably does. 

Lucky we have a guy who covers his mistakes by digging in his pockets. Fixed that bit for you. As I said, this isn’t an attack on SL as such, but it’s his decisions that have led to him putting more money in. 

Like I said many with the wisdom of hindsight have claimed to have not wanted the spending back then (although a very small minority did question it), but it was very much part of a plan of developing the level of the squad with player trading, which in the early days appeared successful, I can remember the number of posts on here how great MA was at the deals he done (although not many would want those dug back up now), SL put the trust in what could be deemed football people to spend his money, but yes he now covers the cost. 

The irony is how many posts on here wanted rid of SL as he is not backing NP with money to go and buy players, without having a clue how the Scott money payments are structured, or even when we get the 1st payment and how much, it could be 5m per over the next 5 years with the 1st payments deferred to a future date for all we know, 

[Davefevs]

55 minutes ago, sh1t_ref_again said:

Fans were quiet happy, when getting excited about new signings under LJ / MA and the money being spent, that got us into the mess, very easy to say it was wrong now with hindsight, then again I can win the lottery every week with hindsight, so not that clever really!

Lucky we have SL who digs into his pockets and covers the spending / mistakes

31 minutes ago, Fuber said:

Plenty of us were pointing out the overspending at the time - for example more than a couple questioned KP signing after DaSilva and Kalas and the point of it all - which was when LJ made the first quip of 'clubs in the bag' approach.

Indeed we were

[exAtyeoMax]

57 minutes ago, sh1t_ref_again said:

Fans were quite happy, when getting excited about new signings under LJ / MA and the money being spent, that got us into the mess, very easy to say it was wrong now with hindsight, then again I can win the lottery every week with hindsight, so not that clever really!

Lucky we have SL who digs into his pockets and covers the spending / mistakes

Some were, some weren't…

I didn't think it was sustainable but hey, I'm no football/financial expert. 

[exAtyeoMax]

40 minutes ago, Fuber said:

Plenty of us were pointing out the overspending at the time - for example more than a couple questioned KP signing after DaSilva and Kalas and the point of it all - which was when LJ made the first quip of 'clubs in the bag' approach.

yes, I was always suspicious of the 'trading model' being paramount in SL's eyes…it's not sustainable, ie returns aren't guaranteed

[Davefevs]

3 minutes ago, exAtyeoMax said:

yes, I was always suspicious of the 'trading model' being paramount in SL's eyes…it's not sustainable, ie returns aren't guaranteed

Haters gonna hate, but I saw us being like Rovers, selling Stewart, Browning, Ellington, Taylor, Hayles, Lambert etc, all those £1m+ transfers each season were covering the deficit.  My concern (if I had any for Rovers) was what happens when they run out of players to sell?  Answer: they end up in the National League!

We were doing the same.  Ashton was running out of sellable players.  He knew it, he had his life raft ready.

[exAtyeoMax]

2 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Haters gonna hate, but I saw us being like Rovers, selling Stewart, Browning, Ellington, Taylor, Hayles, Lambert etc, all those £1m+ transfers each season were covering the deficit.  My concern (if I had any for Rovers) was what happens when they run out of players to sell?  Answer: they end up in the National League!

We were doing the same.  Ashton was running out of sellable players.  He knew it, he had his life raft ready.

Same here!

I also felt that SL had his priority in the wrong place. Too much emphasis on player trading and not on recruitment, building a good squad to progress. I'm scared that SL is reverting to that way of thinking again because we sold two players for a decent amount. 

[ciderwithtommy]

17 minutes ago, sh1t_ref_again said:

Like I said many with the wisdom of hindsight have claimed to have not wanted the spending back then (although a very small minority did question it), but it was very much part of a plan of developing the level of the squad with player trading, which in the early days appeared successful, I can remember the number of posts on here how great MA was at the deals he done (although not many would want those dug back up now), SL put the trust in what could be deemed football people to spend his money, but yes he now covers the cost. 

The irony is how many posts on here wanted rid of SL as he is not backing NP with money to go and buy players, without having a clue how the Scott money payments are structured, or even when we get the 1st payment and how much, it could be 5m per over the next 5 years with the 1st payments deferred to a future date for all we know, 

I seem to be in the minority, I don’t want SL out nor did I cheerlead us spending crazily - or maybe I’m not in the minority! Middle ground for me is he is covering the cost of his own decisions, which does make him better than most owners of clubs in the UK, but not one that I feel indebted to. 

[Davefevs]

2 minutes ago, exAtyeoMax said:

Same here!

I also felt that SL had his priority in the wrong place. Too much emphasis on player trading and not on recruitment, building a good squad to progress. I'm scared that SL is reverting to that way of thinking again because we sold two players for a decent amount. 

Max (she) for CEO

[ciderwithtommy]

1 hour ago, bcfc01 said:

Agreed.

SL has pushed the boat out before and it seems a bit strange that he's now adopting such an austere stance when the club are not threatened by FFP and has around 35m to go into the accounts.

The only logical explanation is that there is serious interest in the club and he wants to make it as attractive as possible to outside investors. The other explanation is that he is gearing up to get rid of NP, but I don't really want to contemplate that scenario as it will cause some mayhem imo.

Not certain that your final two points are exclusive of each other - balanced books and the opportunity to bring in your own management with no compo to pay is pretty enticing 

[Fuber]

32 minutes ago, exAtyeoMax said:

yes, I was always suspicious of the 'trading model' being paramount in SL's eyes…it's not sustainable, ie returns aren't guaranteed

Would have worked - had we kept streamline with regards to recruitment. But LJ wanted clubs in bag so he got clubs in bag.

Under a different manager it may have worked - but as has been outed at Hibs, LJ is just a pretty poor manager.

[mozo]

2 hours ago, Fuber said:

Would have worked - had we kept streamline with regards to recruitment. But LJ wanted clubs in bag so he got clubs in bag.

Under a different manager it may have worked - but as has been outed at Hibs, LJ is just a pretty poor manager.

MA and JL made some really good signings, and also some really good sales. There, I said it.

[Fuber]

4 minutes ago, mozo said:

MA and JL made some really good signings, and also some really good sales. There, I said it.

Did they?

Debatable for me - if you compared profit on disposal of players that they (JL/MA) signed, it'd be close. Even with Webster.

Edited August 30, 2023 by Fuber